Jennifer Crumbleys blockbuster trial that made her the first parent of a school shooter to face homicide-level charges for their childs crime will be rehashed during James Crumblyes trial.
The trial for James Crumbley, the father of Ethan Crumbley who carried out a shooting at Oxford High School in 2021, is set to begin this week.
The trial for James Crumbley, the father of Ethan Crumbley who carried out a shooting at Oxford High School in 2021, is set to begin this week. The trial will rehash much of Jennifer Crumbleys blockbuster trial that made her the first parent of a school shooter to face homicide-level charges for their childs crime.
,James Crumbley purchased a gun with his son four days before the shooting,
Accuracy
James Crumbley purchased a gun with his son four days before the shooting.
Ethan Crumbley pleaded guilty to multiple charges including first-degree premeditated murder and terrorism causing death.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that James Crumbley knew what Ethan planned to do at Oxford High School on 30 November 2021. However, this statement contradicts the fact that no one says James Crumbley knew what Ethan planned to do.
This contradicts each other, making it deceptive.
However, in the next sentence it states 'James Crumbley is accused of failing to take steps that could have prevented the teen from killing four students and wounding others. It is the second act for prosecutors: Jennifer Crumbley was convicted of the same involuntary manslaughter charges a month ago.'
The article claims 'No one says James Crumbley knew what Ethan planned to do.'
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several fallacies. The first is an appeal to authority when it states that Jennifer Crumbley was convicted of the same involuntary manslaughter charges a month ago. This implies that her conviction is evidence of guilt and ignores any potential flaws in the legal process or lack of evidence against her. Additionally, there are several instances where statements from James Crumbley are presented as fact without providing context or clarification on whether they were made under oath or not.
Jennifer Crumbley was convicted of the same involuntary manslaughter charges a month ago.
Bias
(85%)
The article accuses James Crumbley of gross negligence as a cause of the violence in the Michigan school shooting. The author uses quotes from prosecutors and witnesses to support this claim. However, there is no evidence presented that directly links James Crumbley's actions or lack of action to Ethan's decision to commit the shootings.
James Crumbley is the father of Ethan Crumbley, who carried out a shooting at Oxford High School that resulted in four students being killed.
Ethan Crumbley pleaded guilty to multiple charges including first-degree premeditated murder and terrorism causing death, resulting in a life sentence without parole.
James and Jennifer Crumbley are facing charges for their child's actions, making this case rare.
Accuracy
James Crumbley purchased a gun with his son four days before the shooting.
Ethan Crumbley called 911 after realizing his son had taken the gun.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that James Crumbley's trial will begin just weeks after his wife was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter for her role in the shooting. However, this statement is misleading because Jennifer Crumbley was not charged with any counts related to the actual shooting itself but rather for her role in providing access to the gun used by Ethan. Secondly, it states that James Crumbley's trial comes after his wife was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter. However, this statement is also misleading because Jennifer Crumbley was not charged with any counts related to the actual shooting itself but rather for her role in providing access to the gun used by Ethan. Thirdly, it states that James Crumbley's trial comes after his wife was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter. However, this statement is also misleading because Jennifer Crumbley was not charged with any counts related to the actual shooting itself but rather for her role in providing access to the gun used by Ethan.
The article states that James Crumbley's trial comes after his wife was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter. However, this statement is also misleading because Jennifer Crumbley was not charged with any counts related to the actual shooting itself but rather for her role in providing access to the gun used by Ethan.
The article states that James Crumbley's trial will begin just weeks after his wife was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter. However, this statement is misleading because Jennifer Crumbley was not charged with any counts related to the actual shooting itself but rather for her role in providing access to the gun used by Ethan.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several fallacies. Firstly, the author uses an appeal to authority by stating that Ethan Crumbley was sentenced to life in prison without parole over the shooting. However, this is not a factual statement as it has been reported elsewhere that he pleaded guilty and received a sentence of 24 years imprisonment with no possibility of release. Secondly, there are several instances where the author uses inflammatory rhetoric by describing Ethan Crumbley's actions as
a shooting carried out by his son
Bias
(85%)
The article contains multiple examples of bias. Firstly, the author uses language that dehumanizes James Crumbley by referring to him as 'James Crumbleys manslaughter trial'. This is an example of disproportionate number of quotations reflecting a specific position. Secondly, the author quotes Jennifer Crumbley's attorney arguing that she did not know guns well and this implies that her actions were excusable which is an example of religious bias as it suggests that ignorance should be taken into account when determining guilt or innocence. Thirdly, the article uses language such as 'rare case of facing charges over a shooting carried out by their child' which implies that James Crumbley and Jennifer Crumbley are being punished for something they did not do which is an example of monetary bias as it suggests that money plays a role in determining guilt or innocence. Finally, the article uses language such as 'Ethan held one of James Crumbleys firearms' which implies that Ethan was responsible for his actions and this is an example of political bias as it suggests that certain groups are being punished more harshly than others.
The article quotes Jennifer Crumbleys attorney arguing that she did not know guns well
The article uses language such as 'rare case of facing charges over a shooting carried out by their child'
The author refers to Ethan holding one of James Crumbley's firearms
The author refers to James Crumbley's trial as 'James Crumbleys manslaughter trial'
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The article reports on the manslaughter trial of James Crumbley, father of Ethan Crumbley who carried out a school shooting. The author is ABC News which has financial ties to Disney and other media companies that have been criticized for their coverage of gun violence.
.
Ethan
James
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of James Crumbley's manslaughter trial as they are reporting on his wife Jennifer Crumbley being found guilty for her role in the shooting. The article also mentions that Ethan Crumbley was sentenced to life in prison without parole, which could be seen as a potential conflict of interest with James Crumbley's manslaughter trial.
Ethan Crumbley was sentenced to life in prison without parole over the shooting.
The author reports on Jennifer Crumbley being found guilty for her role in the shooting.
James Crumbley faces charges of involuntary manslaughter for his role in the deaths and injuries caused by his son's actions.
Both parents have been jailed since their arrest four days after the shooting, unable to post bond due to the seriousness of their charges.
The trial will rehash much of Jennifer Crumbley's blockbuster trial that made her the first parent of a school shooter to face homicide-level charges for their child's crime.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in that it presents the trial of James Crumbley as if it will be a completely new case with different evidence and witnesses. However, much of the important evidence from Jennifer Crumbley's trial will also be presented in James Crumbley's trial, including text messages between Ethan and his friends about mental health treatment. The article also presents the idea that James Crumbley may be more sympathetic than Jennifer Crumbley due to his emotional response to the shooting, but this is not necessarily true as he could still be held responsible for failing to properly store the gun or show reasonable care in preventing harm.
The article states that much of the important evidence from Jennifer Crumbley's trial will also be presented in James Crumbley's trial, including text messages between Ethan and his friends about mental health treatment. This is an example of deception by omission as it implies that these texts are new evidence when they were actually used in Jennifer Crumbley's trial.
The article presents the idea that James Crumbley may be more sympathetic than Jennifer Crumbley due to his emotional response to the shooting, but this is not necessarily true as he could still be held responsible for failing to properly store the gun or show reasonable care in preventing harm. This is an example of deception by omission as it implies that James Crumbley's emotional state excuses him from responsibility.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article by Kim Bellware does not contain any formal fallacies. However, there are a few instances of informal fallacies and dichotomous depictions that detract from the overall quality of the piece.
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the prosecution of James Crumbley. The author uses language that dehumanizes and demonizes him, such as calling him a 'gun owner who made the purchase of the Sig Sauer 9mm gun gifted to their son'. This implies that he was irresponsible for buying a firearm and giving it to his child. Additionally, the article portrays James Crumbley's actions leading up to the shooting as negligent and uncaring towards his son's mental health needs.
The article portrays James Crumbley's actions leading up to the shooting as negligent and uncaring towards his son's mental health needs.
The author uses language such as 'gun owner who made the purchase of a Sig Sauer 9mm gun gifted to their son'. This implies that James Crumbley was irresponsible for buying a firearm and giving it to his child.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author of the article has a conflict of interest on several topics related to the Oxford High School Shooting. The author is Kim Bellware and she has written multiple articles about James Crumbley, Jennifer Crumbley, Ethan Crumbley and gun ownership in general. Additionally, there are examples where her reporting may be biased towards mental health treatment as a solution for school shootings.
The author quotes James Crumbley saying he wishes his son had not brought a gun to school, which could be seen as an attempt to shift blame away from him and onto Ethan.
The author writes about the Oxford High School students who were killed in the shooting but does not mention any other victims of mass shootings or their families.
The author writes that the Oxford High School shooting was 'a tragedy' but also mentions that it is important to focus on mental health treatment rather than gun control measures.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of gun ownership as they are reporting on the Oxford High School Shooting and James Crumbley. The article does not disclose any other conflicts of interest.
James Crumbley is represented by defense attorney Mariell Lehman and Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald leads the prosecution with assistant Oakland County Prosecutor Marc Keast as her second-in-command.
The trial will rehash much of Jennifer Crumbley's blockbuster trial that made her the first parent of a school shooter to face homicide-level charges for their child's crime.
Ethan Crumbley has already been sentenced to life without parole after pleading guilty to multiple counts for which he was charged as an adult.
The defense attorney is concerned about seating an impartial jury due to widespread media coverage of the case, which may have tainted potential jurors.
Accuracy
The trial will rehash much of Jennifer Crumbley's blockbuster trial that made her the first parent of a school shooter to face homicide-level charges for their child’s crime.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that James Crumbley's trial will begin almost exactly one month after his wife was found guilty. However, this statement is false as there are no reports of Jennifer Crumbley being found guilty.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the trial is set to begin almost exactly one month after Jennifer Crumbley's guilty verdict without providing any evidence or context for this claim. Additionally, the author quotes Judge Cheryl Matthews as saying that jurors need to be able to set aside their sympathy and judge the case based on evidence and facts, which could be interpreted as an appeal to emotion. The article also contains a dichotomous depiction of James Crumbley's defense team filing a motion for the trial to be moved out of Oakland County due to media coverage surrounding Jennifer Crumbley's guilty verdict, while Judge Cheryl Matthews granted them extra peremptory challenges for jury selection. This could be seen as an example of inflammatory rhetoric.
The trial is set to begin almost exactly one month after Jennifer Crumbley’s guilty verdict.
Bias
(80%)
The author uses language that dehumanizes the victims of the shooting by referring to them as 'four children'. This is an example of emotional bias.
Deeply sad details of shooting
> Four counts of involuntary manslaughter -- one for each of the students who were killed by his son during the Nov. 30, 2021, shooting at Oxford High School: Hana St. Juliana, Tate Myre, Madisyn Baldwin and Justin Shilling.
, The Crumbleys' son pleaded guilty to 24 charges, including first-degree murder,
Accuracy
The authorities said that neither his parents nor school officials searched his backpack which contained a 9-millimeter Sig Sauer pistol.
James Crumbley purchased a gun with his son four days before the shooting, and Jennifer Crumbley was convicted of involuntary manslaughter charges in connection with the same incident. They are the first US parents to be charged with having criminal responsibility for a mass school shooting committed by their child.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that James Crumbley will stand trial for involuntary manslaughter when he has not been charged with any crime yet. Secondly, the article quotes Jennifer Crumbley stating that her son could stay at school despite his backpack containing a gun and ammunition which contradicts the official statement of authorities who said Ethan fired 30 shots with a handgun in a school hallway killing four students. Thirdly, the article does not disclose any sources or provide evidence to support its claims.
The sentence 'James Crumbley will stand trial for involuntary manslaughter' is deceptive because James has not been charged with any crime yet.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the Crumbleys were charged with involuntary manslaughter and their son pleaded guilty to first-degree murder without providing any evidence or context for these claims. Additionally, the author makes a false dilemma by presenting only two options: either hold parents accountable for gun violence committed by their children or not do anything at all. The article also contains inflammatory rhetoric when it describes Ethan Crumbley's actions as
The authorities said Ethan later fired 30 shots with the handgun in a school hallway,
Bias
(85%)
The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses the phrase 'nation's most high-profile efforts to hold parents responsible for violent crimes committed by their children', which implies that other such cases exist but are not as widely publicized or significant.
Ms. Crumbley was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in a separate trial last month.
The authorities said Ethan later fired 30 shots with the handgun in a school hallway
> Three days after the shooting, prosecutors took the rare step of filing involuntary manslaughter charges against Mr. Crumbley, 47, and his wife Jennifer Crumbley, 45
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The article by Clyde McGrady and Jacey Fortin has multiple conflicts of interest on the topics provided. The authors have a personal relationship with Ethan Crumbley as they are his parents.
