General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumswinstars
(4,279 posts)Progressive Jones
(6,011 posts)joshcryer
(62,536 posts)...and will not look kindly on him or his wife.
They can't answer to that.
And the parents being who they are may actually give the kid a defense that he otherwise would not have been available to him.
wnylib
(26,025 posts)The behavior of the parents has created a more sympathetic image of their son.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)But he'll have a defense unlike all these other mass shooters. We will see this go to trial.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)I doubt there will be any trials.
The overwhelming majority of criminal cases do not go to trial.
jimfields33
(19,382 posts)The Rittenhouse trial was more then enough for all our lifetimes. I just dont think we need to know every nock and cranny of these horrid people.
wnylib
(26,025 posts)She has stated that he will be tried as an adult. And she has charged the parents. The only thing to stop trials now would be separate plea deals for Nathan and his parents.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)Regardless of how determined a prosecutor might be, most criminal cases are disposed with a guilty plea.
Aside from that, she doesnt decide whether he is competent to stand trial anyway.
RockRaven
(19,381 posts)rateyes
(17,460 posts)fall far from the asshole.
BradAllison
(1,879 posts)Not exactly Lorne Malvo though.
Response to RandySF (Original post)
Meadowoak This message was self-deleted by its author.
WhiskeyGrinder
(26,958 posts)USALiberal
(10,877 posts)ms liberty
(11,237 posts)malaise
(296,133 posts)Asking for a friend
no_hypocrisy
(54,910 posts)BlueNProud
(1,096 posts)Busterscruggs
(448 posts)Their letter to Trump? These 2 are as deep red as their little black hearts can get. Hopefully justice will be swift and severe
malaise
(296,133 posts)I just saw the mother's mug shot - she dyed her hair.
llmart
(17,624 posts)These two aren't exactly members of Mensa.
underpants
(196,512 posts)wnylib
(26,025 posts)the school also has some responsibility in allowing him to return to class. Never should have happened.
In 1964, when a kid in my 9th grade math class set off a firecracker that startled the hell out of all of us, he was immediately removed from class. Don't know what happened to him, but he did not return to that school again.
underpants
(196,512 posts)They wanted him to go back to class. The school has to do one or the other - back to class or kick him out but make sure he has a way to get home.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)I dont know if youve looked at a map, but their house was within walking distance.
underpants
(196,512 posts)This whole thing is so sad.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)If you look at Oxford MI on Google maps, theres one street where you cant access street view. Thats the street the Crumbleys lived on.
CrackityJones75
(2,403 posts)I know because we are .8 away.
They likely could not have made him walk home. Shame.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)I doubt they are nationally uniform.
However, they had sufficient cause for a 72 hour psych hold. There is transportation provided for that.
underpants
(196,512 posts)Thanks for the information
wnylib
(26,025 posts)in class and calling social services if the parents refused to take him?
Somebody has to protect the other students in school when a seriously disturbed kid demonstrates in his behavior that he is a potential threat.
Wingus Dingus
(9,173 posts)Mom is pretty good at lying and "not getting caught", probably convinced the staff there was no threat and they would comply. School staff probably had a bias to believe them, this being a white middle class boy who wasn't previously noted to be a troublemaker, with two white parents with jobs and a nice new car who came in looking fake-concerned.
wnylib
(26,025 posts)for home schooling kids today to keep them alive through graduation.
CrackityJones75
(2,403 posts)My reply isnt to your post just replying because it is down the list.
There is a lit of revisionist looking backwards posting here about what the school should have done. School administrators are way overworked these days and I think it is too much to ask that we put it on them to stop these tragedies from happening. Legislators should start fucking legislating!!!!
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)Im not sure you know what that word means.
They knew the kid was not safe to be around other students.
Being overworked does not relieve them of their responsibilities, unfortunately.
CrackityJones75
(2,403 posts)Go listen to the school officials statements.
wnylib
(26,025 posts)They have a responsibility to every child (and adult) who is inside their building or on their premises. They are responsible for providing a safe learning atmosphere.
School shootings are not a new phenomenon. Every school should have policies in place for removing a potential threat from the premises. A kid who draws pictures of bullets, blood, a person with bullet holes, and writes that his life is useless, that he can't stop the thoughts, and adds, "help me" is a very serious threat to himself or to others. What more does it take to ring the alarm bells loud enough to act?
Since the parents refused to take him, they could have called social services.
That kid's drawings and notes were a literal plea for help that neither his parents nor the school gave him. 11 families besides the Crumbleys are now dealing with the consequences.
The school did not make Nathan into a child who could kill. The school did not provide him with a gun or with ammunition. But with knowledge of his fantasies and state of mind, they gave him access to victims. In a situation like the school was confronted with, the mass shooting might have been prevented if they had told the parents flat out that they could not keep a student in his mental state in school and they would contact social services to take him if the parents refused. Then investigate the parents for neglect.
CrackityJones75
(2,403 posts)They said that there were no indicators of this with the boy.
wnylib
(26,025 posts)I've no idea what your point is.
The indicators that Nathan was in an unstable state of mind that presented a threat to himself or to others were quite clear and obvious.
If you are referring to what I posted about social services investigating the parents for neglect, I stated it as a consequence when the parents refused to acknowledge Nathan's troubled state of mind and take him from the school. I was not suggesting that they did not provide him with adequate food, clothing, and shelter. I was saying that there was good reason to question their competence in recognizing and dealing with an obvious mental health issue in their son.
CrackityJones75
(2,403 posts)According to the interview I listened to yesterday there were no indicators that he was going to do this. No history of bullying. Whether or not that is true is one thing but that was the statement.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)Considering that most fatal accidents happen at home, what statistics make you believe that being home is safer?
Aside from fatalities, guess where most violent and sexual abuse of children happens.
Progressive Jones
(6,011 posts)The police should have already been there when the parents showed up.
Cha
(319,089 posts)rules the roost as has been reported.
TY
MoonRiver
(36,975 posts)And that's the tree!
kairos12
(13,594 posts)VGNonly
(8,492 posts)maybe he is.
Wounded Bear
(64,329 posts)Definitely seems to run in this family.
womanofthehills
(10,988 posts)Thinking it was ok for a kid who wrote this to go back to his class. It was a very alarming note.
I
Kaleva
(40,365 posts)Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)Crumbley was a dangerous person. Schools have a responsibility to protect students from other students who may be dangerous.
If a student manifests indications that the student may be dangerous, then it is their job to remove that student from the environment.
To call that some form of responsibility shifting is absurd. That would be like an employer saying yeah, I know your co-worker is abusive, but thats on him. No, we hold those in charge of workplaces, schools, and other facilities responsible for what they allow to occur within them.
Kaleva
(40,365 posts)Your comment:
"If a student manifests indications that the student may be dangerous, then it is their job to remove that student from the environment."
Maybe if the school knew the kid had easy access to guns then his behavior in school may be an indication that the situation was bad and warranted his removal from the premises. Drawing pics and looking up ammo on the internet in of itself may be concerning but in of itself, not dangerous.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)Its up to a jury to decide what is dangerous upon review of all relevant facts and circumstances. A much richer factual context will no doubt be the subject of comprehensive discovery.
There are some small pieces of the larger factual tableau, which do seem to raise issues. Certainly what was the exact subject of the discussion, and contemporaneous notes kept in the course thereof, as well as what red flags may or may not have been apparent, will be grist fir the mill of deciding (a) did the school staff have sufficient information such that (b) they knew or should have known that the teen was or was not an exceptional risk and (c) if so, were their actions appropriate within the exercise of ordinary standards of applicable professional judgment.
But, starting backwards from how things wound up, it may be difficult to establish a lack of liability. Theres enough to avoid a motion to dismiss.