The Crumbleys have maintained that the gun was locked in a drawer, while the prosecution has argued that Ethan had easy access to it.Įither way, as one judge noted, Michigan has no safe storage law involving guns. "They certainly had the ability to prevent it." they did none of them," the prosecutor said. "They could have checked (the backpack) to see if he had the gun, taken him home from school, adequately secure the weapon. One judge asked the prosecutor: What do you fault the parents with the most? Smith responded: “Yes, but that doesn’t extend to every action that they encounter.” “Don’t parents have a legal duty for the welfare of their children?” one judge asked. but criminal trials are not based on whether parents made the right decisions or did the right things,” defense attorney Shannon Smith argued, stressing the case will set a dangerous precedent for parents everywhere if allowed to proceed. “I will concede that these parents made tremendously bad decisions. Lawyers for the Crumbleys argue the prosecution is overreaching in trying to hold the parents responsible for their son’s actions. “They knew he was fascinated with guns … he had targets on his bedroom wall.” “Instead of getting him help, they bought him a gun,” Shada said. Months later, he said, they bought him what he wanted more than anything else. Instead, Shada stressed, his dad “told him to take some pills and suck it up” while his mom laughed at him. "These parents knew he had reported hallucinations … (and) had asked to go to the doctor. “His intentional act was foreseeable,” Oakland County Assistant Prosecutor Joseph Shada argued to the court. Dad 'told him to take some pills and suck it up'
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |