Jackson Jambalaya

Took those two down for a reason. No proof or evidence that was the case and I'm not going to be responsible for a rumor starting. Heaven knows there have been enough already.

Comment 2 was a response what appeared to be a joke by anon 8:29. It was humor. I would hope that any attorney, or anyone else for that matter, reading this blog would see it as such. It was not intended to be read as fact or rumor under such serious circumstances.

anon 10:58, should read "to what appeared...". Again, no offense intended.

Just wondering since I am not a lawyer....Would there ever be a time during a suit brought by the families of the victims that Karen Irby would be required to give a deposition?

Kingfish why do you think that Stuart's attorney Lisa Binder, was not listed on the Certificate of Service?

Y'all might want to do a little digging into the McCartys and their role in the aggravated DUI trial of Dustin Dill that also resulted in an unfortunate death. Then take a look at which law firm defended Dill.

The McCartys have been here before but the facts are different this time. Everyone associated with Karen is being evasive for a number of big time reasons ... some of which have nothing to do at all with Karen's impending prison sentence.

And then there is the worries and fears of Sheriff Campaign Contribution.

KAREN, GET YOURSELF INDEPENDENT COUNSEL ASAP.

So basically- avoid having dinner/social contact with the McCarty's?? Sounds like they are poison!

Yeah I read some of the Dill stuff. (also a VERY, very sad story) and I was thinking I bet the McCartys think they should just stay at home now. Wrong place, wrong time TWICE.

Farese defending though, interesting.

And man there's a bazillion dill recipes out there.

I am bummed out by what seems to be an insider story here. Does anyone know why the McCartys are being interviewed?

The McCartys had dinner with the Irbys at the CCJ the night of the wreck so the story goes.

8/24@11:18: "Would there ever be a time during a suit brought by the families of the victims that Karen Irby would be required to give a deposition?"

Yes and No. Yes, the plaintiffs could try to take her deposition. However, she would most assuredly invoke the privilege against self-incrimination as to every single question. So no, they wouldn't get any answers.

Curt, they'd get better than her answers. When she pleads the 5th, the civil court infers the answer would be adverse to her interests.

Typically the court in the civil case will stay the case pending the outcome of the criminal case.

For sure, this site cuts both ways. JacksonJambalaya seems to
be a great source of late breaking news, great analysis from KF and other contributors, but it is also the source of most of the rumors that I have heard regarding this high profile case. If some of these rumors turn out to be fact, this case will be one for the books.

10:11 Actually what you call rumors on this blog for the most part are known facts. KF does a good job of deleting posts that are just rumors. However, sometimes you have to read between the lines and do some digging yourself to figure out the true facts. One example is the McCartys connection to the lawyers for the estate of Dr. Pogue. I had to do my own digging to figure that one out.

Finally, if you think this blog is the only place people are "chatting" about this case, you need to get out more. Go to any place in Jackson where people gather other than maybe a church, and you are going to hear people talking about this case. Lots of people know the Irbys or know of the Irbys and many people had a UMMC connection to Dr. Pogue. Also, I don't recall in my forty plus years of living in the Jackson another drunk woman driving down Old Canton Road at 100mph and killing two people.

better remove my prior post. cause everything I repeated, I saw here.

Didn't the guy in Hattiesburg that killed the young USM student over the weekend get immedicatley charged with DUI?! Also- released on 1 MILLION dollar bond!
Once again- a different form of justice there as opposed to NE Jackson!

As far as Stuart leaving the CCJ driving, it is no way it can be covered up if the security tape from the CCJ shows he was driving, or there were witnesses that saw him leaving the CCJ driving which I suspect is the case. Think about it. The DA can't be wanting to interview the McCartys just to find out what the Irbys ate and drank at the CCJ the night of the wreck. It's got to be more.

thanks for house keeping. We should do our part and stick to verfiable facts and leave speculation and rumor out of the conversation.

8/25@4:16:

You're absolutely correct. Taking the 5th in a civil case is the equivalent of saying "I did it."

That being said, she still has to invoke the privilege, due to the severity of the consequences in the criminal case.

There's no way in hell I would EVER let one of my clients testify in a civil case that was even remotely related to his criminal case.

OK. Another question: If Karen Irby loses in civil court and has to pay money (probably lots of it) to the Pogue estate, would her husband's money be considered her money?

How does the "blog administrator" distinguish fact from rumor? Many of the same, or similar, comments or theories are removed while others are left in place; what gives? Was Stuart driving or not?

Anon 7:35 - we will just have to wait for the rest of the story to be go public, or KF to do some more digging. ;)

7:35 I don't know how much you have read KF's blog, but go back and read first Aug 14 "Judge Green gives DA 15 minutes with Stuart Irby" and last Aug 17 "JPD: Helping victim or the defense? Read carefully, and you might have your last question answered.

Any chance the FBI could take over this case in some capacity? Your thoughts Curt?

8:55pm:

In order for the FBI to get involved in this case, there would have to be some basis for federal jurisdiction. In other words, there would have to be a probable violation of some federal statute.

This usually takes the form of mail/wire fraud, rackets, official corruption, or civil rights violations (if the defendant is a "state actor").

Its unlikely to find such a violation in a case which is, at its core, a state-law aggravated DUI case.

so did the deposition take place yesterday- September 1 ??!