to think this isn't right? mother convicted if manslaughter

[greenacrylicpaint]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68223118

A jury has found a Michigan mother guilty of involuntary manslaughter for failing to stop her son from carrying out a deadly school shooting.

by all means, she didn't come across as mother of the year, but come on.
what sentence will the father get?
an absent father in a similar case?

oh america

Erm, she is an adult, why on earth would her parents be anything to do with this

She and the father are culpable and I hope he gets a similar sentence, although if she was the one actively buying him the gun then its worse for her

We need to see more of this, more parents held responsible when their children do things like this

We need more convictions of parents who buy their disturbed children guns and ignore obvious warnings.It's not like school shootings are rare and they can't anticipate them. If I caught my son googling ammunition I would have him arrested.

I think they have some responsibility yes.
They bought their mentally unwell son a gun, they failed to get help when he told them he was having hallucinations, they refused to take him home that day after being called in to see very disturbing pictures he'd drawn.
Then they hid.

Yes. They should be held accountable for their part in this.

• Not like. Sorry for all the typos. This case makes me angry as I have family in the US. In an open carry state.

'Her husband, James, is facing a separate trial on the same charges.'

Did you even read it OP?

They gave him a gun. Of course they are culpable.

How could she forsee that giving her mentally ill son who was having hallucinations and drawing pictures about shooting people free and easy access to a gun that was bought illegally would end up in him shooting people?

That's like giving a drunk 14 year old the keys to a car so they can drive home, because they've had a go in a car park, and then being suprised when they crash and kill someone.

I don't see how anyone could forsee this going a different way tbh

I think the school is also guilty in this case.

There’s a very unique set of circumstances here which means that it’s not going to be the case that all parents of children who commit crimes are going to be charged.

The perpetrator was a mentally ill 15 year old, who told his parents he was hearing voices and repeatedly asked for help. They refused to do so, they refused to take him home and get him mental health support when the school asked him to because they had to “get back to work”, they illegally bought him a gun and didn’t keep it locked up and when he killed 4 people they fled with his savings rather than get him an attorney.

Take the parental relationship out of it. This is the same law that is used to prosecute getaway drivers in final armed robberies. They didn’t shoot anyone, but their active involvement led to the death occurring.

Image any other scenario where someone has expressed intent and have then been given a weapon. This person is at best an accessory beforehand or an accomplice.

I think it’s a fair conviction too. Even if you look at gross negligence manslaughter in the UK, a prosecution could theoretically be possible here too.

CPS guidelines on GNM:

a) The defendant owed a duty of care to the deceased, assessed by

• Whether the damage was foreseeable;
• Whether the deceased was in an appropriate position of proximity to the defendant;
• Whether it was fair and just to impose liability on the defendant.

b) By a negligent act or omission the defendant was in breach of the duty which he owed to the deceased; c) The negligent act or omission was a cause of the death; and d) The negligence, which was a cause of the death, amounts to gross negligence and is therefore a crime.

I suppose where it might fail in the UK is whether a school mum had an automatic duty of care to school children she had probably never met (lack of proximity). But looking at the legal tests at least, I think it ticks all the other boxes, so not surprising really.

They bought their kid a gun!! To me it’s no different to the get away driver in a bank robbery that went wrong still being charged with robbery and murder. They might not have pulled the trigger but they enabled the crime to happen.

The mum and dad firstly should never have bought the gun and secondly should have sought external help when their son starting displaying disturbing behaviour. Yes, she deserves it. Not all parents in this position will but she enabled this.

It's kind of the ultimate conclusion of the logic being demonstrated on the XL bully thread tbf. The view that irresponsible owners should face manslaughter charges.

In this case it's a bit different as the son acted out of free will but it certainly doesn't seem that she helped matters one bit.

I feel so sorry for the parents of the victims. Such a totally avoidable tragedy.

Good analogy! The get away driver is also enabling.

If the parent is responsible for buying a gun, is the state also responsible for making guns freely available to buy?

where does it stop? It’s every person right to own a gun.

to me they should be looking at gun control laws. They’re blaming gun users, parents, tv, anybody and anything other than the laws that make access to guns freely available.

Every person over the age of 18? An age limit for a reason. The parents broke the rules that had been set for a reason.

I feel sorry for the victims and their families.

I also feel sorry for the mother who is in an impossible position.

and yes to gun laws being the elephant in the room. but the gun lobby will never admit to being the cause of countless deaths.

Well from the thread the OP won't accept that most people think this is right and appears not to have read the full story.

People might be alive today if the parent had done their duty as a parent and also not armed their son.

The thing is the state should also bear responsibility here, for allowing a system where these kinds of people have access to guns in the first place. In such circumstances prosecuting the mother for a homicide offence looks rather like scapegoating. It's punishing an individual rather than tackling the deeper causes; blaming one ordinary person rather than admitting that it's the people in power who are at least as much at fault.

Why would you want her to appeal, she ignored her child's cries for help and the schools then bought him the gun he then shot people with. She all but pulled the trigger.

The farther is being tried separately, I assume they are expecting the same outcome.

YABU. She bought her child a gun. She is just as responsible, whether she pulled the trigger or not.

And if anything we need to see MORE of this, parents who arm their children need to start being charged. School shootings in the USA are out of hand and it's about time we started seeing some consequences.

Did you miss the part where she told him to cover his tracks better when his school caught him trying to buy ammo online? Or the fact she text him to say 'don't do it' when she heard there'd been an incident at the school ?

She knew.

Everyone who supports and funds the NRA has blood on their hands.
Everyone who votes for pro-gun administrations in the US has blood on their hands.
The owner of the gun shop has blood on their hands.
Certainly, the parents are implicated too, but in my opinion the collective guilt goes much further.

The collective madness of gun rights in the USA is terrifying. I say this as someone with American in-laws, some of whom are pro guns.