Jackson Jambalaya

BIG suprise!

what Dr in the RIGHT mind would say he is not WELL enough?? after Irby being seen socializing etc...

12:12 I, too, am appalled.

I REALLY didn't think a local doctor would be so foolish as to take that risk.

Let's do our civic duty and give the prosecutor a list of names of those who have told us they talked with Stuart and he was fine.

Maybe then, Judge Green would get PO'd enough to unseal the record and "out" the doctor.

I, for one, hope he's reading this and is worried!

If he's proud, he can " own it" without revealing any medical information.

Someone needs to send Judge Green the article Dr. Parrott, the President of Belhaven, wrote about his visit with Stuart Irby. Everyone knows Irby has been out and about, traveling, and socializing. How could a doctor say he was unfit to answer questions from the DA for fifteen minutes? If Stuart gets out of this, there's going to be some very unhappy people in Jackson.

Why would he not want to see the DA? There's got to be a reason, and it's not a medical one either.

um, to protect his wife? only two people know what went on inside that vehicle prior to the crash. one of them can't be compelled to talk, one of them can. for now, the defense hasn't yet decided whether he should or should not remember what happened in the car. so, for now, they'll hedge with the bs doctor's excuse. i'm sure it wasn't hard for him to find a doctor to lie for him. if anyone has ever taken a doctor's deposition they know that doctor's lie worse than lawyers.

... only two people know what went on inside that vehicle prior to the crash.

But a minimum of four people including Stuart and Karen knows what happened between the JCC and the crash site. One of those people is Sheriff Campaign Contribution.

If this goes to trial it is going to be very, very ugly for a certain elected official in Hinds County.

9:20, Really? What information could an "elected official" possibly know about this case? These are strong accusations, please enlighten us, thanks (no, this is not Curt).

Looks like he can give the DA 15 minutes. Stuart was seen by many people riding his bike to River Hills Country Club about two months ago. He told someone that he couldn't drive but he could "ride".

It's River Hills Tennis Club and CCJ ( Country Club of Jackson)

OK. Tell me this someone. If the DA has proof that Stuart is traveling, attending social events, and now riding his bike around town, how do they let the judge know this?

Five gets you ten that private investigators already have photos of Stuart out and about.

I don't know that the DA has proof. He probably isn't moving in the same social circles.

But, the DA could get proof of the attended " out of town social event" rather easily So could KF.

Asheville, NC... August...county records... the event was postponed because of the accident

This is turning sleazy....

why not just let the lawyers and judge do their thing ?

because he rides a bike or goes to an out of town event doesnt
mean anything about the trauma he suffered or his ability to accurately remember the accident.

re: 11:24 am

But it does mean he is physically able and strong enough to talk to the DA for 15 minutes.

yet, more example of Kingfish's one way street of allowing rumor and innuendo.

If it supports his storyline, the comments will remain. If it bashes one of the people he is "after" he is OK with the rumor.

can we vote to change the gutter press known as Jackson Jambalaya to The Jackson Enquirer? or the JFP gossip column?

Let's hope those photos of Stuart riding his bicycle show a helmet on his head.

11:56 - Press? This is a personal blog! LMAO

Look. Let's tell it like it is. It was the Irby's friends who first told the whole story about their shot gun marriage and what was really going with the couple when that "Love the Irbys" article first came out in the Clarion Ledger right after the wreck. Now it's those same friends who know how he is doing and what he is doing, and they are still talking.
The man is obviously well enough to travel and bike so he is darn well able to talk to the DA for 15 minutes. He is definitely trying to dodge the questions, and it's not because he can't be interviewed or he can't remember. I am more convinced than ever he just doesn't want to have to tell what he knows.

Of course Stuart Irby wants to protect his wife. Anyone would do the same. Really the whole aggravated assault to avoid spousal privilege is a kind of sleazy end-run anyway; it's justified under the circumstances but it ignores the reason spousal privilege exists in the first place.

2:20 How can you be sure Stuart Irby wants to protect his wife? And no, not "everyone would do the same." Stuart Irby could be protecting himself and others, and I am not talking about his wife.

Look...if Stuart doesn't remember the accident he can say so officially in under 15 minutes.

The problem is that Stuart is physically active and has lucid conversations with long time friends and acquaintances with no sign of memory loss.

Nobody is buying this that knows Stuart.

It appears his lawyer doesn't want him on the record for some reason. DUH, what could that be? Perhaps, a former President could offer insight on that one!

If Stuart does remember then his lawyer is helping him to obstruct justice ( though she's probably said, " Before we go forward, here's what will happen if you remember X, and he's what will happen if you don't remember X and here are the benefits of Y. As your attorney if I don't know whether X or Y applies, I can petition the court on Y theory. You do have to tell me, after knowing the consequences if you feel up to testifying" ) THAT is a legitimate concern for the community.

Spousal privilege , when one spouse causes injury to another doesn't apply for a reason! Stuart is SOL on " protecting his wife" just like any battered spouse is SOL when they " forgive" the one who battered them. The community has an interest in making sure the spouse causing injury isn't easily able to do so again.

It's just a fact that Stuart is doing remarkably well and is perfectly lucid...ain't no " innuendo" or " sleazy" to it save for the doctor or the lawyer if she
s playing dumb. He's well enough to state for the record if he remembers the accident or not!

1156. The vote idea is great. In fact, why don't we try it out with ummmmmm you? We'll use a test vote to see if its YOUR ass that gets voted off the site first? I'm casting the first stone, umm errr I meant, vote. Goodbye asshole.

Second vote to send the ass packing.

what is Karen's defense? not guilty? okay....but why? Why is she not guilty? Maybe that has something to do with what's going on.....

her defense is for sure that she is not guilty of depraved heart murder (life sentence). she could be convicted of a lesser included offense like aggravated dui (which carries a max of 25 years per count) if the case goes to trial and her lawyer elects to give the jury a lesser included offense instruction. and i agree, that surely what all this is about. if she had been indicted on aggravated dui this would likely be playing out differently.

her defense is for sure that she is not guilty of depraved heart murder (life sentence). she could be convicted of a lesser included offense like aggravated dui (which carries a max of 25 years per count) if the case goes to trial and her lawyer elects to give the jury a lesser included offense instruction. and i agree, that surely what all this is about. if she had been indicted on aggravated dui this would likely be playing out differently.

i understand the depraved heart sentence and all that...but why is she not guilty of that???? that is the big ????

In my opinion, that has to do with what Stuart is doing or not doing.
Frankly, you can get a Dr's excuse for most things these days.

In my opinion, that has to do with what Stuart is doing or not doing.
Frankly, you can get a Dr's excuse for most things these days.

Driving under the influence and killing two people is SLEAZY

Adultery is SLEAZY

Having arguments that result in the police being called is SLEAZY

Being arrested for disorderly conduct is SLEAZY

Helping cover up a crime with false statements is SLEAZY

Being able to object to such SLEAZINESS on KF's blog is PRICELESS

Sounds like the original driver from JCC was Stuart - then after the stop from the friendly police- Karen became driver - so maybe no one wants to remember what really happened and who saw what or maybe- Stuart was the driver the whole time and Karen was to drunk to remember.

This scenerio (Stuart driving at the time of the crash.) doesn't fit from the eye witness accounts from the people trying to help after the crash.
There was one guy talking about Karen talking and yelling for help and some "old guy" in the passenger side of the car. Anyone else remember this?

The Irbys were pinned in the car. There would be too many witnesses for anyone but Karen to be in the driver's seat.

And, if Stuart initially was driving, the CCJ videos should show it.