James Crumbley may come off as more sympathetic than his wife. But is it enough?

From behind bars, James Crumbley's life has imploded.

His teenage son was locked up forever in December for committing a deadly mass school shooting.

His wife was just convicted of involuntary manslaughter for her role in that shooting.

His messy family life was broadcast to the world for two years, including that his wife was cheating on him.

Now it's his turn to be judged.

In three weeks, James Crumbley will be the third member of his family to test the criminal justice system when he goes to trial over his alleged role in the Nov. 30, 2021, Oxford High School mass shooting carried out by his son Ethan Crumbley, who has been sentenced to life without parole. The teenager killed four students and injured seven others, using a gun that his parents had gifted him just days earlier.

Like his wife, James Crumbley is facing involuntary manslaughter charges as prosecutors seek to hold him responsible for the deaths of four students killed by his son. Legal experts say it's unlikely he will try to cut a deal at this stage, mainly because it's unlikely the prosecution will offer him one considering its landmark victory last week. On Wednesday, an Oakland County jury made history in convicting Jennifer Crumbley, making her the first parent in America to be held criminally responsible for a mass school shooting committed by their child.

'Anytime you put 12 in a box, anything is possible'

But a fresh set of jurors will be judging James Crumbley, legal experts note, and he could get a different result than his wife.

As seasoned criminal defense attorney Art Weiss noted: "Anytime you put 12 in a box, anything is possible."

James Crumbley has to combat some damning evidence, legal experts stress, including the fact that he was the parent who bought the gun for his son, not his wife. And she testified that he was responsible for safely storing it, not her.

Still, legal experts maintain, James Crumbley may have an edge with his jury that his wife didn't have, particularly if he comes off as more sympathetic than she did, and can convince the jury that his son was supposed to use the gun only with him at the shooting range and that it was properly secured until his wife used it to go target shooting with their son three days before the massacre.

That latter point was what "hammered it home" for the jury in Jennifer Crumbley's trial — that the mom was the last adult known to be in possession of the weapon before the shooting, according to the jury foreperson.

Meanwhile, Jennifer Crumbley's trial left her husband with a road map of potential pitfalls, and key questions to consider: Should the father testify and risk coming off as unsympathetic or unreliable like his wife did, as the jury foreperson stated? Should his lawyer focus more on who had the gun last and how it wasn't a gift for the son to use as he pleased, and less on all the testimony about bad parenting? Should jurors be allowed to see the school shooting video and crime scene photos or learn about the wife's affair?

James Crumbley may also want to focus on what wasn't presented at his wife's trial, legal experts note.

Her trial included no testimony from mental health experts despite the prosecution's contention that the shooter was a troubled, delusional teen who was spiraling downward, but got no help. There was also no testimony from neighbors alleging the shooter was left home alone as a child, another point the prosecution has previously argued.

'I'd renew the motion for a change of venue'

Then there's this time-sensitive issue to consider: Can James Crumbley get a fair trial in Oakland County, given all the publicity of his wife's trial?

"I’d renew the motion for a change of venue," said Weiss, president of the Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan who has been practicing law for 48 years. Weiss argues the Oakland County jury pool is "saturated" with people whose views have been tainted by the massacre and the wife's conviction, warranting a new trial location.

"The fact that you have 12 of your neighbors and friends determine guilt (for one parent) — I think it should be moved," he said.

Weiss said James Crumbley should also learn from his wife's mistakes — particularly her demeanor on the witness stand.

"She didn't come across as sympathetic," Weiss said of Jennifer Crumbley, referring specifically to her comment that she wouldn't have done anything differently leading up to the shooting.

As Weiss noted, the jury foreperson said in a "Today" show interview that Jennifer Crumbley's no-regret comment "was repeated a lot in the deliberation room. I think that it was very upsetting to hear."

'He needs to say: This is horrific'

If James Crumbley takes the stand, Weiss cautioned, he must show genuine concern for the victims' families and genuine regret for the pain his son caused.

"He's got to take some hits on it," Weiss said. "He needs to say, 'This is a horrific, horrific incident. I feel terrible. I just didn't see it. I didn't know. And the professionals who were there didn't help me.' "

Legal experts say jurors may also see and hear testimony that puts James Crumbley in a better light than his wife.

He was the one who was cheated on. He was the one who was sobbing in a police substation, and telling his son that he loved him repeatedly. He was the one crying in the back of a police cruiser, telling his wife to remember that he loved her if anything happened.

He's also the one who bought his son the murder weapon.

Gun purchase is 'a real problem' for dad

"I think it’s a real problem for him," said prominent criminal defense attorney William Swor, who stressed that the dad buying a gun for his minor son addresses what this case is about. Swor, who has practiced law for more than four decades, is past president of the American Board of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

"Was James Crumbley grossly negligent? And did that gross negligence result in the death of one or more people? That's what this trial is about. And that's the only thing this trial is about," Swor said.

According to trial testimony, James Crumbley took his son to Acme Shooting Goods in Oxford on Black Friday 2021 — four days before the shooting — and bought a 9mm Sig Sauer handgun. That same day, his 15-year-old son posted a photo on Instagram of himself holding the semi-automatic handgun, writing: "Just got my new beauty today. SIG SAUER 9mm."

Weiss, meanwhile, argues that the gun sale can be explained to the jury in a way that challenges the "gifted-gun" narrative.

"There’s a difference between buying the gun as a gift, and giving him that gun," Weiss said, adding if it really was the boy's gun, "Then why did the parents have to hide it?

"I think you have to drive home the difference between buying him the gun and giving him the gun to use," Weiss said.

A fight to keep the shooting video out of trial

Legal experts say another key factor that weighed heavily in the mom's trial was the jury being allowed to see the graphic school shooting video and photos from the crime scene.

Jennifer Crumbley's lawyer tried to keep the video and photos out, but to no avail. James Crumbley's lawyer is also trying to keep that evidence out, though a decision has not yet been made.

"The issue there is you’re adding emotion. You're adding passion," said Swor, arguing this is exactly what the judge tells jurors they can't consider in reaching a verdict.

"The judge tells the jury, 'You should not be moved by sympathy, passion, or prejudice,' and here the only purpose of this video is to inflame the passion of the jury," Swor said.

James Crumbley's lawyer, Mariell Lehman, filed a motion last week urging the judge to keep the shooting video and crime scene photos out of the trial, arguing they are "extremely prejudicial" and irrelevant to the case.

"The issues in the upcoming trial are not how the students died," Lehman writes, "but rather allegations that Mr. Crumbley failed to act to prevent the students' deaths when he was allegedly aware of a situation in which he should have acted."

Gun purchase is prosecution's 'strong point'

Former federal prosecutor Mark Chutkow said the dad buying the gun will likely play a bigger role in this second trial.

"On the prosecution side, that's a definite strong point," Chutkow said, adding the mom "didn't know how to use guns. He did."

Moreover, Chutkow noted, it was the dad who raced to the house after learning there was an active shooter at his son's high school, looked for the gun and panicked when he discovered it was missing.

Still, Chutkow believes James Crumbley may have an edge on the prosecution.

"Having the second trial is a slight advantage for the defense," said Chutkow, who led the Criminal Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Detroit and is now in private practice at the Detroit-based Dykema law firm. "The witnesses have already gone through this wrenching testimony once, and it’s hard to summon up the strength to do it again. And sometimes witnesses, when they have to repeat their testimony — it may not have the same (impact) the second time around."

Chutkow, who successfully prosecuted former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick in the city's 2012 historic public corruption trial, believes the prosecution will continue to hammer away its narrative that the Crumbleys were not "adequately safeguarding their child."

"I’m sure they’ll repeat those same points since it worked," Chutkow said.

Humanizing James Crumbley

But the defense is likely to pick up on what didn't work in Jennifer Crumbley's trial, Chutkow said, like her coming off as distant and not showing "appropriate emotion."

"The defense will make a real effort to humanize the husband, where the jurors will try to (ask): 'Hey, could that that happen to me? Could I make a mistake that could cause my children to harm someone else?'” Chutkow said, adding jurors may be more empathetic toward James Crumbley because he showed distress and emotion after the shooting.

"If the parent is showing that they are devastated, the jury can kind of see that," Chutkow said, adding if James Crumbley seems "genuine and authentic" in his remorse, that makes a big difference.

"If they have some sympathy for him, that could go a long way," Chutkow said, "and the case becomes that much harder for the prosecution."

Change of venue 'uphill battle'

Michael Bullotta, a former federal prosecutor in Detroit and Los Angeles who is now a criminal defense lawyer, also believes a change of venue due to juror bias is a valid concern in this case.

"People are people. And they are going to naturally have that innate desire to be a good member of the community, and may feel a duty to convict," Bullotta said.

But, he added, "It's a very uphill battle to change venue."

For Bullotta, the key issue in the dad's case is the gun.

"Whenever you leave a gun, not secured, and somebody ends up being killed, that’s foreseeable," said Bullotta, who also believes James Crumbley's chances of conviction may be greater than his wife's given "he was in charge of the gun," at least according to her testimony.

Still, Bullotta added: "It’s going to be a completely different jury. And they are going to have to decide everything from scratch ... there is a possibility that the result can be different, and that will surely raise a claim of unfairness by the parties involved."

But an acquittal for James Crumbley doesn't change anything for Jennifer Crumbley.

Asked what it means to the mom's case should the father be acquitted, multiple legal experts answered exactly the same: "Nothing."

Experts see grounds for overturning Jennifer Crumbley's conviction

For both Crumbleys, legal experts believe a crucial decision by Oakland County Circuit Court Judge Cheryl Matthews hurts both spouses: jurors being allowed to see excerpts from the shooter's journal and text messages he sent a friend seven months before the shooting. In the journal and in those text messages, the shooter claims that his parents ignored his mental health issues and never got him help, prompting him to shoot up the school.

The shooter, however, refused to testify in his mom's case, which is his right. That meant the defense couldn't challenge what the shooter wrote or texted, and was therefore left hamstrung. Still, the judge let the incriminating journal and text messages in, setting the stage for what legal experts predict will be a successful appeal.

"I think there’s a good chance of it getting reversed," Bullotta said of the Jennifer Crumbley verdict. "I was very surprised when I learned of these journal entries and text messages of a non-testifying witness being permitted."

As Bullotta and other legal experts explained, criminal defendants have a right to confront their accusers. In this case, the shooter was accusing his parents of ignoring his mental health issues and even laughing at him, yet he refused to testify, so his allegations could not be challenged by the defense.

And if the jury forewoman's comments are any indication, the shooter's journal entries influenced the jury during deliberations, as she stated on the "Today" show: “To me personally, it wasn’t as impactful as the evidence of her having the gun, but I know for my fellow jurors, that the notebook played a huge part."

Weiss also is troubled by the journal being admitted as evidence, saying: "I don’t know what theory the journal came in on, but to me that‘s a violation of confrontation."

Bullotta called the journal entries "classic hearsay."

"Unless the court of appeals deems it harmless error," Bullotta said, "the case will likely be reversed."

Tresa Baldas is an award-winning courts and legal issues reporter who received a 2023 Wade H. McCree Advancement of Justice Award by the Michigan Press Association and was named the 2020 Richard Milliman "Michigan" Journalist of the Year by the Michigan Press Association. Contact her at tbaldas@freepress.com.

This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Experts: James Crumbley should learn from mistakes of convicted wife