The results of the Oakland County prosecutor’s investigation into Saturday’s mass shooting at a Rochester Hills burst pad, according to Macomb County Prosecutor Peter Lucido, will be used to decide whether to command the shooter’s mother for allegedly being informed her son posed a threat without reporting it.
According to Oakland County Judge Michael Bouchard, her 42-year-old boy Michael Nash allegedly stalked their Shelby Township house while the investigation into the firing at the Brookland Plaza Splash Pad, which resulted in nine fatal injuries, and allegedly lied to police about how the government was spying on them.
Following that initial contact with government, Nash retained an counsel and has cut off communications with authorities, Bouchard said during a Monday press conference. Neither Bouchard’s business nor Lucido knows who Kathryn Nash’s lawyer is. Nash has not been accused of a murder or accused of any crime. On Tuesday, she made several unsuccessful attempts to speak with her counsel.
According to state sheriff’s authorities, the research is attempting to find out why the suspect made the decisions he did and who may have had any knowledge of that information, according to a Tuesday statement from the county sheriff’s office.
According to Lucido, there may be costs against Kathryn Nash because, he claimed,” a pretty interesting door” was opened with the Jennifer and James Crumbley involuntary manslaughter convictions in April. The Crumbleys were careless parents who purchased their boy a 9mm weapons despite him being in crisis, according to Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald, who claimed they could have fairly predicted he might commit a firing.
According to Lucido, what charges might be brought in response to the findings of the investigation.
After a judge found the Crumbleys guilty of failing to stop their 15-year-old son Ethan from starting a shooting rampage at Oxford High School, which left four kids dead and seven others wounded, the pair were each given a 10-year prison sentence.
Lucido said the same process — and perhaps Michigan’s fresh “red flag” law — may be applied to the splash sheet shooting case.
” It would depend on what the research shows and a lot of different stuff,” Lucido said. ” It’s an interesting question — with the Crumbley case, ( Ethan Crumbley ) was a minor, the parents had purchased the gun for him, taught him how to shoot. There are therefore some glaring differences between the two situations.
However, if I receive an investigative report that demonstrates the family was careless or that she had a sense of what her son was planning to accomplish, it’s possible there will be charges, because a very interesting case has been officially opened with the Crumbley case.
The Oakland County attorney is likewise awaiting Bouchard’s record.
We are convinced that the coroner’s analysis of the Rochester Hills capturing will provide that information, said Tuesday, McDonald spokeswoman Gabby Klos.
The Crumbley views “were a unique, incredibly egregious set of circumstances” where a minor’s parents bought him a gun, gave him access to it, and then allegedly lied when it was necessary to protect others when danger was imminent, according to Kos.
Does red symbol laws apply?
Lucido questioned the country’s red flag law’s potential application if it was determined Kathryn Nash knew about her son’s ideas. The legislation, which took effect in late- February, allows health professionals, family members, guardians, previous dating partners and police to protest a judge to reduce firearms from individuals whom they believe are at risk of using those weapons against others or themselves.
However, the law does n’t mandate that people report those who are suspected of posing a threat when they are removing their weapons. In the Shelby Township smart home he shared with his mother, Michael Nash had 11 weapon, including an AR-style semiautomatic weapons, and left one at the splash sheet.
The entire purpose of the red flag laws is to notify law enforcement to that, Lucido, who represented Shelby Township while serving in the Legislature, said,” If the family knew that he had a mental issue, was talking anxious thing, and was having 11 weapons. The question is, what’s the legal duty to report? A minor’s situation is simpler because an adult is legally responsible for their children. In this case, I’d have to find out what did she know and why did n’t she call?”
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer , last year signed the Extreme Risk Order Protection Act , that was similar to other” red flag “laws that had been adopted by 20 other states. Three months after the shooting rampage on Michigan State University’s campus on February 13, 2023 that left three students dead and five others injured, the bill included a three-billion firearms regulation package that was introduced three months later.
A family member, guardian, law enforcement official, or other healthcare provider can petition for an order imposing an extreme risk protection order in accordance with the new law, with or without giving notice to the petitioner. Judges must hold hearings within a certain time frame to ensure compliance if the petition is granted and the person’s firearms are taken away, or the petition’s subject may be able to challenge the order.
The complaint must provide evidence that warrants the issuance of an extreme risk protection order because the respondent is reasonably expected to seriously injure himself, herself, or another person by possessing a firearm and has engaged in an act or acts or made significant threats that are in line with the expectation, the law mandates.
A violation of a judge’s confiscation order could lead to the issuance of misdemeanor and felony charges, the finding of contempt of court, or an automatic extension of the order. After conviction, the felony charges range from one to five years in prison. A first felony offense is punishable by a fine of up to$ 1,000 and a maximum of a year in prison.
Some people have criticized the law, saying it violates the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms. Sheriff of Livingston County Mike Murphy has stated that he  will not carry out the law.
Critics warn of law’s threat
George Donnini, an attorney at Butzel Long, said he can envision prosecutors using the red flag law to try to prove negligence, even though the law does n’t compel people to report suspected threats.
” It seems that Michael Nash suffered from some sort of mental issues, he had a bunch of guns, and his mother presumably saw this erratic behavior,” Donnini said”. Do I think his mother will be charged? No, in my opinion. Then again, ( Michael Nash ) killed himself, so there’s no way to get justice.
Because this was a terrible event with kids out playing in the splash pad, every parent’s worst nightmare, are prosecutors going to look for someone to charge? I would n’t rule it out”, Donnini said. Is it disrespectful to ignore the red flag law now that it is in place? Although I do n’t believe it to be true, I can see some prosecutor saying that if you could have taken action through this red flag law but you did n’t, that would give the judge a reason to convict.” The parents were held accountable for their son’s actions, and now that the Crumbley decision is out there.
The Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan officials declined to comment.
Wade Fink, a Birmingham criminal defense attorney, said he does n’t expect Kathryn Nash to be charged.
The Crumbley case was special because it made it necessary to make sure certain things are done when raising a child who is a minor and is exhibiting troubling symptoms, Fink said. ” ( Michael Nash ) was a 42- year- old man who was living with his mother, who had a right to possess weapons, since he had no criminal convictions.
I do n’t think the mother is held accountable unless there is proof that she supported and aided the crime or that she encouraged it. However, you should n’t face criminal charges for turning in your son just because he’s talking crazy and has guns, and I’d love to be Pete Lucido’s defense attorney.
Prior to the Crumbley convictions, parents were only prosecuted criminally for abusing their own children. Parents were held accountable in civil court for the harm that their children caused others, including the successful successful cases brought in response to the mass shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School and Columbine High School. The first parents to be found guilty of crimes connected to the mass shooting of their child were Jennifer and James Crumbley.
Rick Ector, director of Legally Armed in Detroit, a firearm training and advocacy agency, said Second Amendment advocates warned the red flag law could open the door to prosecutions.
Ector, a board member of the National Rifle Association, said,” We talked about this when they first started talking about red flag laws. People did n’t actually think they could find themselves liable for not doing something about a situation that materialized, but there’s always the law of unintended circumstances.”
___
© 2024 www. detroitnews.com
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
