OXFORD, Mich. – Family members of the four students murdered in the 2021 Oxford High School shooting spoke Tuesday at the sentencing hearing for the shooter’s parents.
Several victim impact statements were delivered in court on Tuesday, April 9, at the sentencing of James and Jennifer Crumbley, the parents of the Oxford shooter. The Crumbley parents were facing sentencing weeks after their separate involuntary manslaughter convictions in connection with the shooting.
---> MORE: Oxford shooter’s parents get 10-15 years in prison for roles in massacre
Four children were murdered in the shooting: 14-year-old Hana St. Juliana; 16-year-old Tate Myre; 17-year-old Madisyn Baldwin; and 17-year-old Justin Shilling. James and Jennifer Crumbley were each charged with and convicted of four counts of involuntary manslaughter for those children’s deaths.
The parents, and one sibling, of the four murdered children spoke in court on Tuesday, with several asking for the judge to hand down the harshest possible sentences to James and Jennifer Crumbley. All of their victim impact statements are below.
Family of Madisyn Baldwin
Nicole Beausoleil, the mother of Madisyn Baldwin, made a statement on the record on Tuesday. You can watch her remarks below.
Family of Justin Shilling
Jill Soave, the mother of Justin Shilling, made a statement on the record on Tuesday. You can watch her remarks below.
Craig Shilling, the father of Justin Shilling, made a statement on the record on Tuesday. You can watch his remarks below.
Family of Hana St. Juliana
Reina St. Juliana, the sister of Hana St. Juliana, made a statement on the record on Tuesday. You can watch her remarks below.
Steve St. Juliana, the father of Hana St. Juliana, made a statement on the record on Tuesday. You can watch his remarks below.
Family of Tate Myre
Buck Myre, the father of Tate Myre, made a statement on the record on Tuesday. You can watch his remarks below.
---> Conviction of Oxford shooter’s parents ‘just the beginning’ for parents of murdered students
What are victim impact statements?
Under Michigan law, victims of a crime are given an opportunity to speak at the defendant’s sentencing hearing through what’s called a victim impact statement. During this time, a victim can express in court how the defendant and/or the crime has impacted them, their lives, and those around them, both physically and emotionally.
The defendant must be present to hear these statements, allowing victims to speak directly to the perpetrator, if they wish.
Why are victim impact statements important?
There are two types of victim impact statements in Michigan: written and oral.
Oral impact statements are made during the sentencing hearing, in which the defendant must be present to hear them. For victims, oral impact statements allow them to speak in a setting in which they are not being questioned, or cross-examined, as they would be if they testified during a defendant’s trial.
A victim impact statement can be read out loud in court by someone other than the original author, if the victim requests as much.
Traditional written impact statements operate a bit differently.
Under Michigan law, victims are given an opportunity to provide a written impact statement that will be seen and reviewed by the judge handling the case. This statement would become part of a pre-sentence investigation report, if one is created, which means the statement is provided before a sentencing hearing occurs. The judge is meant to consider this statement as they decide how to sentence the defendant.
Because written victim impact statements are attached to the judge’s pre-sentence investigation report, they will follow the defendant around going forward. Meaning, if a convicted person is in jail and seeks parole down the road, the written impact statements will be associated with their record and may factor into a parole decision.
A victim impact statement “provides an opportunity to express in your own words what you, your family, and others close to you have experienced as a result of the crime,” the U.S. Department of Justice says. “Many victims also find it helps provide some measure of closure to the ordeal the crime has caused.”
What is involuntary manslaughter?
Involuntary manslaughter is one of the lowest homicide-related charges someone can receive after a person is killed. Involuntary manslaughter happens when a person’s death resulted from another person’s negligent or criminal actions.
To qualify as involuntary manslaughter, the death was not intentional or planned by the accused, but rather technically accidental. Still, the person charged with involuntary manslaughter is believed to be responsible for the death, despite their intentions.
Why parents had separate trials
Attorneys for James and Jennifer Crumbley filed motions on Nov. 13, 2023, requesting they stand trial separately for the four counts of involuntary manslaughter they face in connection with the Oxford shooting. They were initially set to be tried together as co-defendants starting on Jan. 23, 2024.
The Oakland County Prosecutor’s Office filed their responses with the Oakland County Circuit Court the same day, expressing support for the motions filed by the couple. But while agreeing the parents are legally entitled to separate trials, prosecutors say two trials will have a negative impact for many groups of people.
“The People admit that the defendant is entitled to a separate trial because some of the evidence introduced against the codefendant at trial would be damaging to the defendant,” the prosecutors’ filing reads. “Separate trials in this case come at significant cost to victims, witnesses, taxpayers, and the additional jurors who will serve. But the Constitution affords the defendant that right, and the People agree that the defendant is entitled to a separate trial.”
In their filings on Nov. 13, prosecutors said they agree that a conflict exists as it relates to jointly trying the shooter’s parents, but also said they raised the issue of a potential conflict on several occasions more than a year ago. Prosecutors previously sought to ensure the defendants knew of this conflict as they agreed to be represented by two separate attorneys who work under the same firm.
The judge ruled in favor of the parents, deciding that they can stand trial separately. Jennifer Crumbley stood trial first beginning at the end of January. James Crumbley stood trial second, beginning on March 7.
Top stories from the trials: