PONTIAC, Mich. — A pretrial hearing Tuesday for the parents of the teenager charged with the Oxford High School mass shooting lasted only 20 minutes, but it laid down ground rules that could change the direction of Jennifer and James Crumbley’s own separate criminal cases.
The actions of the court could effectively cut off avenues for appeal and lead to new lawyers who would represent the couple independently.
The couple are the parents of 15-year-old Ethan Crumbley, who is charged with fatally shooting four students and wounding six others and a teacher in the Nov. 30 incident at the school. The parents have each been charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter because prosecutors say they ignored warning signs and purchased for their son the handgun used in the killings.
Jennifer and James Crumbley are currently represented, respectively, by Shannon Smith and Mariell Lehman, who both work in the same law office and took turns at district court hearings questioning witnesses on behalf of their clients.
The Oakland County Prosecutor’s Office has made an issue out of the parents’ legal representation in the case, saying it could pose potential conflicts at trial regarding individual guilt or innocence for crimes – and ultimately lead to a mistrial or a means of appealing a conviction. The prosecution asked that the Crumbleys be instructed by the judge to understand potential legal pitfalls they might face because of their choice of a legal defense.
"Joint representation from attorneys from the same law firm is uncommon," Oakland Circuit Judge Cheryl Matthews said at Tuesday's hearing in Pontiac, citing state law and court rules. "There is great concern of a conflict of interest.”
Without hearing oral arguments, Matthews said she envisioned a “myriad” of potential problems and planned to appoint two independent attorneys to counsel the Crumbleys separately without others present, including their current lawyers. Legal discussions will be limited to consideration of “conflict of interest” and options for representation.
Matthews’ decision effectively:
—Stalled the pretrial until next month so the parents can weigh how they want to go forward with legal representations.
—Cut off a potential avenue of appealing possible convictions based on conflict or impartiality.
—Advised the Crumbleys they both might need new lawyers to protect their respective rights at trial.
Matthews also said she planned to discuss the parents’ decisions with them in court at a new pretrial date, now set for April 19, and said she would require both to sign waivers that they approve of their attorneys at that time and waive any right of appeal due to conflicts.
The Oakland County Prosecutor’s Office said while the parents have indicated they had no problems with their current attorneys, it could conceivably pose a potential conflict at trial regarding individual guilt or innocence for crimes. One defendant conceivably might decide a different legal strategy from the other, including pleading to an offense.
The Crumbleys have both pleaded not guilty to their charges, felonies which carry up to 15 years in prison. The charges have drawn international attention because they link the parents with the alleged violent behavior of their son.
"Court is cognizant of defendant’s Sixth Amendment rights to counsel of their choice," Matthews said. "But is also committed to ensuring a zealous defense. ...The court must inquire into a conflict of interest.”
“I hope the Crumbleys understand the purpose of the independent counsel," Matthews told the defendants. "I’m concerned that at some point, something could happen to cause a conflict that would damage your position, Mr. Crumbley, or your position, Mrs. Crumbley. I’m here to protect your rights.”
“I’m trying to avoid your rights being implicated in a negative way, but also having to go backwards in this case," Matthews continued. "If there is a conflict in the middle of the trial, that could cause a mistrial.”
Prosecutors say the parents overlooked their son’s ongoing emotional problems; purchased for him the 9-mm semi-automatic handgun as an early Christmas present; and on the morning of the shooting refused to remove him from school and take him somewhere for counseling as recommended by school officials or to alert them the teen had access to a weapon.
In a related development, Matthews on Monday granted a "no-notoriety" legal motion from the prosecutor’s office to avoid using Ethan Crumbley's name in the parents' cases. Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald cited the teenager's desire for "fan mail," his journal and "statistics" that indicate school shooters choose schools for notoriety.
"School shooters don't just happen for no reason and we know why it happened in this case," McDonald said. "We believe the defendants, his parents, are culpable. But what we also know is that the repeated coverage with the shooter's name and image, it sensationalizes that and it actually encourages and increases the risk of a future school shooter, and we just don't want that."
———
