LANSING, Mich. (Michigan News Source) – Members of the Michigan Legislature, Law Enforcement, Prosecutors, and family members of murdered victims gathered in opposition to new legislation that could grant parole for minors who committed murder and juveniles with life sentences.

MORE NEWS: Elissa Slotkin Secures Victory in Tight Michigan Senate Race

Those who were opposed to these bills referenced Miller v. Alabama Supreme Court case which held that the eighth amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment forbids the mandatory sentencing of life in prison without the possibility of parole for juvenile homicide offenders in a 5-4 decision. 

“If these bills simply codified Miller we wouldn’t be up here speaking against the legislation,” Representative Graham Filler (R-St. Johns) said.  “What’s happening in the state right now is a case by case review of these juvenile murderers, unfortunately House Bills 4160-64 go much farther than any current resentencing structure and create laws that are a slap in the face to victims and the families of murdered loved ones, are a slap in the face to communities victimized by these senseless killings, would allow dangerous psychopaths to go free after 10 years in prison.”  

On poster boards surrounding the podium, there were several convicted criminals that had committed murder while under the age of 18, including Jon Siesling, Federico Cruz, Stephen Launsburry, and Ethan Crumbley.  

Crumbley, the youngest of the group, pled guilty to numerous charges after killing four students at Oxford High School in 2021 when he was 15 years old. 

“Regarding the Ethan Crumbley case, the Oakland County Prosecutor has requested life without parole, and due to the heinous nature of his crime, that may actually be his sentence,” Filler said, “The proposed legislation would essentially invalidate the sentence.” 

Eaton County Prosecutor, Doug Lloyd, spoke on behalf of all the other 82 county prosecutors in Michigan in opposition to the bill package, and encouraged residents to contact their local prosecutor regarding the legislation.  He reminded the public that these aren’t just any crimes that are being committed. 

“No these bills are about murder, that’s what we’re here for: first degree murder,” Lloyd said, “We’re not here for shoplifting, we’re not here for trespassing, we’re not here for truancy, we’re here for the most serious of the serious of crimes that we as prosecutors deal with in this state.” 

MORE NEWS: Michigan Has More Teachers and Fewer Students During Teacher Shortage

The bills would take away the authority from prosecutors and courts have in making the “determination as to the best sentence is” for individual communities according to Lloyd. 

Speaking against the bills were also two victims who lost family members to juvenile murderers, including Karan Jackson, founder of Facebook page “Voices for Victims of Murder.” 

“I am a co-victim of murder myself,” Jackson said, “We do not support these bills in any way, my question is why are we even here with these bills if sentencing is already occurring, has already occurred under the laws that we have.” 

“It feels to me like these bills are only here to promote leniency for killers,” she added. 

The second speaker who had lost her brother to murder, and survived an attempt on her life, Crystal Grigonis, who also spoke before a judge earlier this week against reducing a sentence for her family’s killer. 

“Up until this point we were told that my brother’s murderer would be imprisoned for life without parole,” Grigonis said at the press conference, “He has already served twenty-two and a half years so he will be released for parole in twelve and a half years.  What I can tell you is that that is nowhere near enough time that we need to heal – we are all still healing – it has been such an awful last twenty-two and a half years to live through this.” 

Another woman, whose family was affected by murder, had a different perspective on the bills; according to Valencia Warren Gibbs, those who killed when a minor should be given a chance of parole. 

“Should he have been punished, yes, maybe a few years I don’t know,” Gibbs said, “But he was a kid at like 15, at like 15 I did a whole bunch of stuff that I wouldn’t do at 25, and I certainly wouldn’t do at my age now.” 

She described how the individuals involved in the killing were eventually up for parole and had become an author, then eventually a welder and painter. 

“I think this all could have been circumvented and none of these would have happened if he would not have been given a chance to be resentenced,” Gibbs said, “At this juncture, I don’t believe that a child can make any conscience decision about anything, or even have compassion for anything, but as adults we’re supposed to have not just grace and mercy but compassion.” 

A representative from the Campaign for Fair Sentencing of Youth and former prosecutor for Tennessee, Preston Shipp, advocated for Michigan to join the 27 other states who had abolished life without parole for kids. 

“Michigan has been one of our top priority states, since as you heard, it has the largest population of juvenile lifers in the country,” Shipp said. 

He expressed that the legislation would focus on what can these young people become rather than only what they have done.