Who will decide James Crumbley's fate? A look at the jury

Pontiac — A jury of nine women and six men will decide James Crumbley's fate after attorneys spent two days whittling down the panel and despite his attorney's doubts that they'd easily find an impartial jury in Oakland County.

The 15-person jury, which includes three alternates, was finalized Wednesday afternoon in Oakland Circuit Court after attorneys questioned potential jurors for hours on everything from gun ownership and mental illness to parental responsibility and impartiality. The jurors, who appear to be all White, work in a range of jobs, including IT, graphic design, a nurse practitioner, a music teacher and a foster care mom.

Opening statements will begin Thursday morning for Crumbley, 47, who is being tried on four counts of involuntary manslaughter in connection with four students his son fatally shot in November of 2021 at Oxford High School — Hana St. Juliana, 14; Madisyn Baldwin, 17; Tate Myre, 16; and Justin Shilling, 17.

The trial, which marks only the second time a parent has been tried in connection with a mass shooting carried by his or her child, is expected to last two weeks.

Before releasing the newly chosen jury for the rest of the day, Oakland County Circuit Court Judge Cheryl Matthews begged the panel to follow her orders not to speak to anyone about the case to avoid compromising the trial's fairness.

The case has been highly stressful for the victims' families and everyone else involved, she told them.

"This is serious business," Matthews said.

Impartiality emerged as a theme throughout questioning Wednesday. At least five jurors were excused who said they'd have a hard time being impartial. Some said they'd seen the coverage of Jennifer Crumbley's trial or knew about the case previously.

One potential juror was struck from the jury less than a minute after he began talking. He said he thought the charges against Crumbley were a “travesty of injustice” and he said he felt prosecutors brought the charges based on mob mentality from the community and media.

Defense attorney Mariell Lehman had sought to change the venue of the trial, arguing that the media attention surrounding Jennifer Crumbley's trial would make difficult to find an untainted jury. But most of the jury pool who ended up in the box for questioning did not know a significant amount about the case.

Jennifer Crumbley was convicted in early February of four counts of involuntary manslaughter in an unprecedented case against a parent charged for their child's actions in a mass shooting. Her son, shooter Ethan Crumbley, pleaded guilty to terrorism, murder and attempted murder and was sentenced to life without parole in prison in December.

About the jury

Of the 15 jurors, 11 are parents and four are not, though one said she essentially raised her nephew. Six of the jurors have guns in their home, they said.

The jury includes:

• A 29-year-old, single man who works in IT and lives with his mother and stepfather, who does not have any kids. He does not have guns in his home and he said while he generally thinks it’s irresponsible to not keep guns in a safe, it depends on the circumstances.
• A 37-year-old, single man who works as an art director at an advertising agency. He said he has no children and does own several guns for hunting. His guns are stored in a closet.
• A nurse practitioner with two kids, 11 and 15, whose wife used to be a teacher. He said he does not have guns himself, but has a “reasonable expectation” that if people have guns, they keep them in a safe.
• A woman who is a stay-at-home mom who has a licensed foster home with her husband. She has three biological kids, one of whom has depression. She does not have guns. She said her brother also has schizophrenia.
• A woman who works at the front desk of a dental office part-time who has two young children, 2 and 4. She described herself as a “control freak” and said she keeps anything dangerous away from her kids. She said she has an aunt and uncle with mental illnesses.
• A young, pregnant woman who is a stay-at-home mom whose husband is a social worker. Her kids are 2, 4 and “in progress.”
• A woman with three adult children who has guns in the house and used to be a personal trainer. She is a widow and closed her personal training business when her son was struggling with depression as a teen.
• A 64-year-old machinist with two children who doesn’t have guns in the house but doesn’t have a problem with it. He has not read much information about the shooting.
• A man with two children, 9 and 12, who has multiple guns in the home. He said he expects people with guns to be responsible.
• A woman who used to be an elementary school teacher and now is a part-time music teacher. She has two kids, 6 and 9, and has had “no exposure to guns.”
• A woman who is a web developer who has two adult daughters, 20 and 22. She has several guns in her home, mostly that are her husband’s. She said it is irresponsible for guns to be unlocked when children are in the home.
• A man who works in residential trash services who watches his three young grandchildren daily with his wife. He grew up in the U.P. with guns, but said his wife wouldn’t be comfortable with him owning a gun now.
• A retired nurse who is unmarried with no children, but who essentially raised one of her nephews after her sister checked herself into a psychiatric ward. She told her nephew once when he asked that she would prefer not having a gun in the house.
• A woman who has two kids, ages 22 and 25, and said she has guns that were handed down in her family that she uses to shoot at her family cottage.
• A woman who has two kids who has guns in her house, but they are her husband’s. She saw some news coverage of Jennifer Crumbley’s trial, but not much. She said her father died by suicide several decades ago.

Questions mirror facts of case

Throughout jury selection, Lehman’s questions seemed to mirror some of the facts of the case, as she asked potential jurors if kids exaggerated, if they told their friends things they did not tell their parents and how their parents felt when they got called into school for a meeting about their child.

She also asked about the concept of access and their thoughts on parenting, guns and if they noticed signs of mental illnesses in their family members or friends before they opened up to them about it.

During Jennifer Crumbley's trial, texts between the shooter and a friend were shared in which Ethan Crumbley told his friend he'd asked for mental health treatment before the 2021 shooting, but his parents had laughed at him and told him to "suck it up." The Crumbleys were also called into the school for a meeting the morning of the shooting after the school found concerning drawings and phrases on a math worksheet.

Lehman asked several jurors if a parent did not know a child was sneaking out and taking the car, if they should be held responsible if the child committed a crime or hurt someone, and their responses varied. Jennifer and James Crumbely have said they did not know their son took the gun the day of the shooting.

At times during jury selection, prosecutors and Lehman were at odds over what jurors were being asked to decide.

As Lehman was asking a prospective juror about the meaning of access versus permission, Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald accused her of “deceiving” the jury.

Lehman said McDonald's comment was improper and that, as a former judge and a long-time prosecutor, she shouldn’t make statements like that during jury selection. Matthews said Lehman’s question was "in the weeds," but was not deceitful. 

5 jurors dismissed because of challenges being impartial

In all, 19 jurors were dismissed, seven for cause and 12 with peremptory challenges, which means a reason doesn't have to be given. Prosecutors only used five of their peremptory challenges, but Lehman used seven of her eight challenges.

Five people were dismissed were because of their self-confessed inability to be impartial or because they indicated doubts that they could be impartial. One was a high school teacher and a man who said he "might take emotional approach rather than factual approach sometimes" if he hears or sees emotional evidence.

Lehman used her first strike without cause on a man who said he works as a high school teacher in Oakland County. He said Tuesday he believed he could be fair, but acknowledged finding Crumbley not guilty could be uncomfortable for him.

One man who said he closely followed Jennifer Crumbley’s trial said he thought what he heard would “cloud my judgement."

“I’ve been thinking about it since I found out it was this case and I don’t think I can do that (be fair and impartial),” he said.

A man who said he volunteers as an EMS worker said he didn’t know if he would be able to be impartial, especially when confronted with graphic images from the shooting.

Another man was dismissed for cause because he said he saw this case as a “long overdue necessity.” He said he and his wife were unable to have kids, so it bothered him when parents were irresponsible and did not store their guns properly, leading to a child being injured or killed. He said he watched part of Jennifer Crumbley’s trial but her lack of remorse while testifying bothered him, so he turned it off.

Another prospective juror said he felt like he could be fair, but was worried about what people at work would think if he acquitted Crumbley. Many of his coworkers work in Oxford and already had figured out the jury he might be sitting on, he said. He said he was worried about repercussions at work if he acquitted Crumbley. He was dismissed for cause.

Opening statements will begin Thursday.

kberg@detroitnews.com