Judge: No new trials for Oxford shooter's parents

DETROIT — An Oakland County judge has denied the parents of the Oxford High School shooter a chance at a new trials, despite their attorneys' arguments that prosecutors failed to provide potentially favorable evidence to the defense.

Judge Cheryl Matthews issued her decision Wednesday, more than five months after hearing oral arguments about whether a new trial or acquittal was warranted for Jennifer Crumbley and two months after hearing arguments from James Crumbley.

Defense arguments centered on the importance of so-called proffer agreements that witnesses made during initial meetings with prosecutors. The agreements indicated that any statements witnesses made could not be used to prove their guilt.

"In order for the Defendant to demonstrate that the Proffer Agreements were material, she would have to show that the favorable evidence could reasonably be taken to put the whole case in such a different light as to undermine confidence in the verdict," Matthews wrote in her order denying Jennifer Crumbley's motions for a new trial or acquittal.

"Defendant has not shown that the suppressed Proffer Agreements were material. Despite the suppressed evidence, Defendant Jennifer Crumbley received a trial and verdict worthy of confidence based on the cumulative effect of the significant evidence against her."

Two separate juries convicted the Crumbleys of four counts of involuntary manslaughter in early 2024, marking the first and second time in U.S. history a parent was convicted of manslaughter for a mass shooting carried out by his or her child. Matthews sentenced both to 10-15 years in prison.

Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald said now that the verdicts have been reviewed and upheld, it's time to turn the attention away from the Crumbleys and refocus on the victims.

"These cases have always been about just one thing: justice for Madisyn Baldwin, Tate Myre, Hana St. Juliana, Justin Shilling and the other Oxford victims. Judge Matthews' ruling makes clear that no issue raised by the defense affected the trial or the jury’s verdict," McDonald said in a statement.

“Now that the juries’ verdicts have been reviewed and upheld, it is time to turn our attention away from the Crumbleys and refocus on the Oxford victims. The bottom line is both James and Jennifer Crumbley were convicted by juries of their peers after receiving a fair trial.”

Prosecutors have maintained that they did not violate court rules by not giving the Crumbleys' attorneys copies of the so-called proffer agreements they made with Oxford High School counselor Shawn Hopkins and former Dean of Students Nick Ejak. Assistant Prosecutor Marc Keast said the agreements did not have to be shared because they did not make any promises of immunity.

Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald allowed Ejak and Hopkins to sign the proffer agreements, which noted that she would consider the statements made by them during meetings with prosecutors "in deciding how to resolve this investigation as it relates to your client and any charges pending against your client being prosecuted by this office."

Jennifer Crumbley's appellate attorney Michael Deszi argued that prosecutors did have to share the proffer agreements, and failing to do so robbed Crumbley's legal team of a chance to question Hopkins and Ejak on the agreements and ensure the jury knew they had incentive to testify for prosecutors — a factor that Dezsi said could have changed the verdict.

“The prosecution has gone to great lengths to, in my opinion, gaslight us, to tell us this isn’t immunity,” Dezsi said. “This is use immunity.”

He said the jury should have known that Ejak and Hopkins were possibly facing criminal charges, and that the existence of the proffer agreements could have cast doubt on their credibility. Hopkins and Ejak met with shooter Ethan Crumbley and his parents the morning of the November 2021 shooting and they testified about what happened during the 12-minute meeting and Crumbley's demeanor during it.

Federal courts have repeatedly recognized that proffer letters, like the ones given to Ejak and Hopkins, give witnesses an informal grant of immunity, despite the prosecution's claims otherwise, James Crumbley's attorney Alona Sharon wrote in her motion.

Matthews said during a motion hearing for Jennifer Crumbley in late January that she was "very, very" concerned about the possibility of a discovery violation as it relates to the proffer agreements. She repeated this point in April when she heard arguments in James' case.

In her order Wednesday, however, she said the concern was not enough to grant a new trial.

Sharon also argued that Matthews failed to examine whether the shooter properly asserted his Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination, and that Crumbley's trial attorney, Mariell Lehman, failed to object when Matthews did not do this. Matthews did not allow the shooter to testify at Crumbley's trial because he asserted blanket Fifth Amendment protections.

The Crumbleys' son, Ethan Crumbley, was sentenced to life without parole, though he is appealing his sentence and has asked to withdraw his guilty plea. Oakland County Circuit Court Judge Kwame Rowe denied his appeal and Ethan Crumbley has moved it to the Court of Appeals.

Four students were killed in November 2021 shooting at Oxford High School: Hana St. Juliana, 14; Justin Shilling, 17; Tate Myre, 16; and Madisyn Baldwin, 16.

Prosecutors said the Crumbleys acted in a grossly negligent way in storing a gun and ammunition where their son could access it and that they failed to control their child to keep him from harming others.

Matthews declined to hear arguments on most of Jennifer Crumbley's claims in her request for a new trial or an acquittal in a written order in January. The only claim she heard arguments on was related to the proffer agreements.

Matthews questioned Dezsi in January about what Ejak and Hopkins testified to that could have made a difference in the verdict. Dezsi said Ejak and Hopkins gave “subjective” opinions on Crumbley’s actions during the meeting, saying they thought it was odd the parents didn't take their son home, did not hug him and Crumbley ended the meeting abruptly.

"That is what the jury heard, with it being unchallenged by the fact that they were highly incentivized to say that to help the prosecution (to avoid being charged)," Dezsi said.

After the hearing in January, McDonald said there was no conspiracy and no point at which the prosecutors consciously decided not to send the proffer agreements to the defense attorneys.

"We don't keep secrets. We don't hide anything," McDonald said. "We follow the law, and I am not going to take the bait and distract the public and the judge and everyone here from the fact, which is that Jennifer Crumbley's own actions caused the death of those four kids and injured others and terrorized hundreds of others. And any attempt to say anything else is offensive, and it's not right."

__________