PONTIAC, Mich. (AP) — The first U.S. parent to be held criminally responsible for a mass school shooting committed by a child asked a Michigan judge to throw out her conviction Friday, arguing that her trial was spoiled by the prosecutor's failure to disclose key details about two major witnesses.
Nick Ejak and Shawn Hopkins, employees at Oxford High School, were not given immunity in the fatal shooting of four students in 2021. But they had agreed to speak to prosecutors when promised that their words would not be used against them.
The four-page deal was not shared with Jennifer Crumbley's lawyer before her 2024 trial.
Crumbley's appellate attorney argued Friday that the failure to produce the agreement was a fundamental violation of rules that prosecutors must follow.
If the defense had known about the agreement, Crumbley's trial lawyer could have questioned Ejak and Hopkins about it during cross-examination and tried to cast doubt on their credibility, Michael Dezsi said.
“They dangled that carrot over those witnesses to get them to cooperate,” Dezsi said of prosecutors.
Crumbley, 46, is serving a 10-year prison term for involuntary manslaughter. Prosecutors said she had a duty to protect Oxford students from her 15-year-old son, who was given a gun as a gift just a few days before he committed the mass shooting.
Ejak and Hopkins met with Jennifer Crumbley, her husband James, and their son, two hours before the shooting. A teacher was alarmed by their son's drawings of a gun, a bullet and a wounded man on a math paper, accompanied by despondent phrases.
Ejak and Hopkins believed the Crumbleys' son would go home after the morning meeting, but they didn't object when the parents said he would stay at school. No one — staff or parents — checked the teen's backpack for a gun.
Assistant prosecutor Marc Keast said his office had no obligation to turn over agreements with Ejak and Hopkins, who were not charged with crimes.
“Their attorneys reached out to us,” Keast told Judge Cheryl Matthews. “There was no promise. There was no threats. There was no discussion about testimony. We talked about what they did, what happened on November 30.”
Matthews suggested that the failure to produce the agreements likely was a violation by the prosecutor's office. But she also noted that the testimony of Ejak and Hopkins was a “very small part” of the evidence against Jennifer Crumbley.
The judge didn't immediately make a decision about granting a new trial. Matthews rejected other arguments in a nine-page opinion Thursday.
James Crumbley was convicted of involuntary manslaughter at a separate trial and is also serving a 10-year prison term. The Crumbleys' son, now 18, is serving a life sentence for murder and other crimes.
