Prosecutor to James Crumbley: Your wife got a fair jury. You will, too.

Prosecutors are urging a judge to deny James Crumbley's change-of-venue request, arguing he asked this before and was denied, and still has not proven that the Oakland County jury pool is "irredeemably tainted" by the intense media coverage of his historic school shooting case.

Nor was it tainted for his wife's trial, which ended in guilty verdicts on all four counts, the prosecution maintains.

"In Jennifer Crumbley's trial, jury selection was completed far quicker than expected and the number of potential jurors needed to empanel a fair and impartial jury was far fewer than expected," Assistant Oakland County Prosecutor Marc Keast wrote in his latest filing. "Selecting a fair and impartial jury in Oakland County will be achieved in defendant James Crumbley's case as well."

James Crumbley, like his wife, is charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter stemming from the 2021 mass shooting at Oxford High School carried out by his son, who committed the massacre using a gun that was gifted to him by his parents. Four students died and seven other people were injured.

On Feb. 6, an Oakland County jury convicted Jennifer Crumbley.

On March 5, James Crumbley goes to trial on the same charges in the same courtroom where his wife was convicted. He wants his trial moved to another county or have jurors brought in from elsewhere, maintaining he cannot get a fair trial in Oakland County due to the intense media coverage of his and his wife's case, and the "significant" number of people impacted or tied to the shooting.

Prosecutor argues that fair jurors can be found in Oakland County

The prosecution disagrees, arguing the level of pretrial publicity and number of jurors who might have been affected by the shooting is not enough to warrant a change in venue.

James Crumbley "must demonstrate that there is a strong community feeling or bitter prejudice against him," wrote Keast, who maintains the shooter's father has not proven that.

Nor has he proven that publicity of his case is "so extreme and inflammatory" that jurors cannot remain impartial when exposed to it, Keast wrote.

As for Crumbley's arguments that too many people in Oakland County have been impacted by the shooting, or are tied to someone who was involved in it, Keast wrote:

"There is no question the Oxford High School shooting has directly or tangentially affected a large number of people in the community." But, he added, that does not mean "that it will be impossible to seat an impartial jury, especially in a large community like Oakland County."

Oakland County has 1.2 million residents, of whom 75% are adults.

'At the center of the storm'

Keast noted that in the significantly smaller Ingham County, a change of venue request was denied for Michigan State University gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar, who was convicted of sexually abusing scores of teenage girls in 2017.

Ingham County has 284,000 residents, almost 1 million fewer people than Oakland County, Keast wrote, maintaining James Crumbley's request to move his trial is unwarranted.

James Crumbley "unjustly presumes that the community is biased against him, despite a dearth of evidence," Keast wrote, adding: "(He) and his attorney might feel this way because they are at the center of the storm. They have been living this case and paying attention to every news story about the case since the day of the shooting."

But the average Oakland County citizen has not, Keast writes.

In his filing, Keast also sought to refute James Crumbley's claims that Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald has been trashing him from the get-go and pushing a false narrative that he and his wife ignored a mentally ill child, and were on the run after charges were announced.

James Crumbley's lawyer, Mariell Lehman, has argued those claims are not true, yet the public — she maintains — still believes them given the prosecution keeps pushing its false narrative.

Keast disagrees, arguing James Crumbley "has not and cannot identify a single instance" where any allegation or statement by the prosecution is "inaccurate or untrue."

Keast also addressed a key issue in the parents' case: the mental health of their son.

Ethan Crumbley pleaded guilty to all his crimes and is serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole, though his new lawyers have indicated they may appeal his sentence.

Prosecution: There's a difference between crisis and mental illness

The defense has long argued that the prosecution has been inconsistent on this issue, particularly in claiming that the shooter was not mentally ill when it sought to lock him up forever for his crimes, maintaining he knew what he was doing and showed no signs of psychosis or mental illness when he shot up his school. Yet in the parents' case, the defense maintains, the prosecution argues that the Crumbleys ignored a troubled and depressed son who was delusional and spiraling downward.

Keast maintains the shooter was in a state of crisis.

"Being in crisis is not the same as having a statutorily defined mental illness at the time of the offense, and the prosecution has never asserted that the shooter met that definition," Keast wrote, stressing: "This case does not turn on whether (the son) meets the criteria for a mental illness" as defined by state law or medical professionals."

What it does turn on, Keast added, is what the Crumbleys did or did not do when confronted with a child in crisis.

"Gross negligence in this case is proven through (James Crumbley's) actions and inactions when confronted with obvious signs of crisis," Keast writes.

As for James Crumbley's assertion that he and his wife were not on the run in the days after the shooting, Keast wrote: "Although he might not like what the facts show ... he was fleeing."

According to the prosecution, in the days after the shooting, the Crumbleys withdrew large amounts of cash from the bank, stayed at a motel and then hid out at a Detroit art gallery, where a SWAT team arrested them in the middle of the night three days after the shooting.

The Crumbleys have maintained that they were afraid for their safety, that police urged them to leave their home due to safety concerns, and that they had plans with their lawyers to turn themselves in at court the morning after charges were announced.

Jennifer Crumbley is the first parent in America held criminally accountable for a school shooting. Prosecutors seek to make her husband the second parent punished for the deaths of 16-year-old Tate Myre; 17-year-olds Madisyn Baldwin and Justin Shilling, and 14-year-old Hana St. Juliana.

Contact Tresa Baldas: tbaldas@freepress.com

This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Prosecutor fights to keep James Crumbley trial in Oakland County