Jackson Jambalaya

-- you can't tell when he's [Stuart Irby] going to go off, and there was no indication.

AND you don't know when he is going to bang your wife.

BOOM!!!!!!!!

"Weathersby" is typically recited during the jury instruction phase of a criminal trial on the merits. This was a guilty plea wherin there was no agreement or recommendation by the State. Ms. Irby may have some kind of "conflict of interest" issues and they may, or may not, be viable, but not Weathersby, in my humble opinion. Throwing in everything but a j.n.o.v. request in the new Motion, (there is no right to appeal from a guilty plea), appears to lessen the credibility of the real issue. Either way, I don't I don't see a PCCR hearing being Ordered by The Supreme Court.

Additionally the perceived bias during the lower court judge's sentencing "monologue" appears to be the real issue. As an aside, I was wondering just how much criminal law experiance Ms. Irby's new attorney holds.

Weathersby hasn't been cited as a successful defense in appellate decisions in at least thirty years. If given, it tells a jury that if the defendant's version is some version of justifiable homicide, such as self defense,and isn't contradicted by other evidence, the jury should find the defendant not guilty. Under no stretch of imagination could it apply to the facts in the Irby case either. There was no such defense for Irby's attorney to advise her of, therefore, this argument, like all others she has put forth, are without merit. I wonder who is paying Bell to come up with this claptrap?

the best facts for karen irby came out at a time when they couldn't help her and couldn't hurt him. why would one plead open and then bring out essentially exculpatory evidence at the sentencing hearing? why would one plead open to these charges with facts like these on her side?

either (a) she is lying and made up the whole story about stuart kicking her ass at the time of the accident or (b) karen's advocate was getting marching orders from the person who had the most to gain by her going to prison. he was paying the bill afterall.

Per the deposition, paying the bill but complaining about it.

Sad to see her in jail for an accident. Why do the people get more jail time that someone who intentionally murders another.

An accident that killed two innocent people!!! Hello?! 2 people are dead because she CHOSE to drive that night. You know want to know what's sad? They didn't die on impact. They were screaming- theu burned to death. You think about that the next time you talk about how sad it is for Karen. 2 people burned to death. CCJ has means of transportation to get home. She chose to drive. She chose to speed that night. She killed 2 people because of stupid choices SHE made. Feel sorry for the victims.

Shoegirl, why don't you stick to your sappy stories....or better yet, don't even do that.

She should have been honest about EVERYTHING from the beginning. Withholding info is being dishonest in my opinion.

I would love to hear what the EMT's who were at the scene of the wreck have to say. I wonder if Karen mentioned it to them. I know I read somewhere she said that she had "plenty" to drink that night so she was coherent.

After she said that she only had 2 glasses of wine.. I don't believe her, not for one minute. The fact that she stayed with him after the wreck, speaks volumes.

If history is any indication, it seems like she has gotten away with lots in her lifetime. This time she didn't and I don't think she ever dreamed her sentence would be what it was. She probably thought she would be under house arrest and free to drive her kids around town etc....just like she was allowed to do this past year.

So, now she is going to try the blame game.

People say SI used her, it sounds just like the opposite to me. She used SI's money to save her from this and it didn't work. So, now she has a new story. She would have been better off hiring her own attorney , being honest from the beginning and paying for it.

Are they even still married after all this hoopla?

Agreed Shoegirl!

My response to Shoegirl, (what is that?), is that some people randomly or intentionally rob and kill others and, although they have prior felony convivtions, Judge Greene in this case sentences them to 10 years with 6 suspended and 4 to serve. They, the prior convicted felons have no social value whatsoever; the difference is they are preditors and scavengers who committed intentional evil on others. Ms. Irby was wrong for driving drunk and two good people died as a result thereof, she should be punished, but to what extent compared to the previously mentioned thug(s)?

Ha! Sorry for my broken English- I was typing from my phone and all those damn little buttons.....
The whole story is sad- heartbreaking....but she chose to drive that night. Her actions killed 2 people.
Has anyone thought about her being the crazy one that night? Perhaps they started fighting, she started speeding fast because 'if I can't have you no one can' and wanted to kill them both?? Don't always blame the bad guy....Sure, there were documents filed against him for abuse to her and the child, but it doesn't mean he was hurting her that night. Women- especially the ones who so long for that lifestyle and marry for money-will do anything to keep their life in tact. Women can get violent just as well as men. She could have been the one who exploded that night. Think about it- if someone is grabbing you and beating you, wouldn't you slam on brakes??
Her story about the 2 glasses of wine is bogus too- as well as her new allegations against him. Don't stay in a marriage where you AND your children are in danger, first of all. Second, don't use the past to get you out of paying for a crime. If Stuart was the piece of shit she claims he is then leave him! Take what was in the prenup and leave! Don't stay for the country club benefits, the house, and the car! Look what it all got her!! So, when you marry for money you pretty much get what you deserve in the end. I don't care if Mother Theresa herself committed this crime- the past does NOT change anything that happened that night. Like Judge Green said "Good people go to jail all the time"....Karen did some really good things in life- true. BUT, she made a horrible mistake that night and it is time to pay for it. Two innocent lives were gruesomely taken....she has to live with that forever. Atleast she is alive!! Would you rather burn to death in a car or go to jail for less than 18 years? (let's face it- she won't serve 18 years) She is a mother...her children should be her FIRST priority. She wasn't thinking about them when she continued to live in an abusive home. She wasn't thinking about them when she got behind the wheel of the car drunk and drove 70+ miles per hour. Is a ritzy lifestyle THAT important???!!!

4:48- Now, I do agree with you on that. I think the entire judicial system is screwed up. How can one person rape and kill someone and get 10 years, but another can get 100? How can Karen kill 2 people and get 18 years, but another VIOLENT offender can get out in 5? It doesn't make sense to me. Really doesn't. Rapists, child molesters, and intentional murderers all should get life. Or death actually, in my opinion. Get the scum off the streets. But, with DUI cases, I don't know....It is all easy for us to sit here and talk about it because none of us are in their shoes. I wonder what Karen would do if the tables were turned? What if her child had been killed? I know that if someone (intentional or not) killed my child, I would want them to spend eternity paying for it (not by monetary means either)....
I honestly don't agree on her being labeled a violent criminal. She didn't intentionally kill them, so I don't think she should be labeled as violent.

ShoeGirl, you got it! I agree with you 100% and let's not forget the divorce petition that Stuart filed in Sept., 2008 and his reasons for wanting a divorce from Karen.

She and her children should have been out of there before Stuart got home from the hospital last year. There was not one thing he could have done to her at that point.

4:49, is this all speculation or just random meandering on your part? Is, for instance, $12.00 worth "busting a cap" in some hard working store owners brain by some thug, thus depriving the victim and his family of a life and future? This is a true story and the good Judge Greene didn't write a poem on his behalf. This guy got 10 years to serve and had two prior felony convictions and a string of petty crimes and at least 4 kids by three baby mommas. Wonder if he, or the judge, was thinking about those kids during all that time? The point is that there does appear to be some bias against Ms. Irby in this case; enough for a new hearing, who knows?

4:34 said: "I would love to hear what the EMT's who were at the scene of the wreck have to say. I wonder if Karen mentioned it to them. I know I read somewhere she said that she had "plenty" to drink that night so she was coherent."

Karen Irby had a blowout fracture of her eye socket. Her jaw was broken in several places. That side of her body was severely injured down to her broken feet.
It is difficult to believe that Karen Irby told anyone that she had "plenty" to drink considering the broken bones in her face. Trying to get muscles and nerves to move broken bones in order to speak would be a tremendous challenge.

There are so many "what ifs" and "I heard" statements being shouted. If you don't use facts, you have nothing.

Speculation and rumors are easy, convenient weapons for those who are not armed with facts, both for or against a person.

5:53. I agree completely.

Who pulled Shoehoe's string?

The Irby machine's main objective was to protect Stuart Irby at all costs, and that is exactly what happened. It started the night of the wreck with the investigation and ended when Karen stood up in court and pleaded quilty after her Irby machine hired and paid for lawyer convinced her she had no other choice.

5:53- Karen had the facts a year ago and didn't share them so it's hard to believe anything she says at this point!

Who pulled Shoehoe's string?

Who pulled your's little wiener?

5:53- In the article , "Only one Irby will face trial," in the CL after her sentencing, the DA said that she answered the question with "PLENTY" to drink at the wreck.....go read it for yourself.

I don't think the "Irby Machine" is made up of people just hired to go after Karen. Karen reminds me of a teenager who hasn't learned that the blaming others for your actions isn't going to get you anywhere.

I understand her thoughts about the judge reading the poem, but the rest of her stories that keep coming out, I don't believe.

just read the deposition, her account of this fight in the car is so lame. she can't remember much except that he pulled her hair and hit her. I guess it took a year to come up with that.

Very Lame!

8:11 wrote: "5:53- In the article , "Only one Irby will face trial," in the CL after her sentencing, the DA said that she answered the question with "PLENTY" to drink at the wreck.....go read it for yourself."

I just read what Hinds County District Attorney Robert Shuler Smith said regarding this.

From the CL piece:
"When asked at the scene how much she had to drink, Smith said she answered: "Plenty."

Thank you for bringing that fact to my attention. Again, I say, speculation and rumors are easy, convenient weapons for those who are not armed with facts, both for or against a person.

Who pulled your's little wiener?

I don't know--I gave your mom the night off...said she was cramping real bad due to carpal tunnel.

The public didn't find out Karen's story about what happened in the car until her sentencing. That doesn't mean at all that she didn't tell her lawyer and others about it a very long time ago. Just because we didn't know doesn't mean others didn't know, too.

Maybe if Karen Irby were black, she would've gotten 6 years w/ 3 suspended.

Karen is toast. She allocuted, she understood that she had no recourse after she plead guilty, she was adjudicated. What I have seen anyone discuss is that Judge Green was ready to sentence Karen the moment after she plead guilty and received no recommendation for sentencing from the DA. JH asked for a pre-sentencing report. So, if I read the transcript correctly, Judge Green's mind was made up the day she plead. All this other crap is just that, crap. I expect the MSSC to deny certiorari. Karen is toast. I kinda forgot about her already....

Well, I guess that just makes her irrelevant then.

Well, this has certainly gone downhill!

Safe prediction kangaroo. Karen isn't asking the MSSCT for cert. She's simply appealing.

The "plenty" response to the question if Karen had anything to drink can be found in EMT James Bryant's statement to the police. It is page 25 of the documents KingFish linked in the "Police reports" post.

Karen was aparently quite coherent after the accident. She answered that the man in the car was her husband, that she couldn't feel her legs, etc.

I bet they choose not to hear it is my point.

1015. Trust me on this because I have, too, been involved in a really horrible wreck and was badly hurt much like Karen Irby. It's really hard to explain, but there is no way Karen was "quite coherent." You feel like you are floating. You can't think, and you don't even know where you are let alone what you are saying.

roo, they'll hear any appeal. she will lose, but they will hear it.

yes, at times I love to play semantics.

first it was ineffectiveness of counselor (sic). Then it is immaterial aspects rather than in material aspects. Does anyone proof read his writings? Wasn't Attorney Bell the guy who while running for Chancellor said he would also take it upon himself to clean up the criminal docket in Circuit Court if elected. He understands neither jurisdiction nor the law. Oh boy. With a lawyer like that, Karen aint got a prayer

wow....what a jerk thing to say.

Maybe if he had the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS that were paid to her first set of attorneys (for nothing!) then he would have the staff of proof-readers that you think he needs! I for one wish him well!It is so easy to trash a good man behind an anonymous name isn't it?

the man is trashing himself with his foolish filings.

You must have been someone who ass he kicked incourt. (sic)

I wish this shoegirl crap would just go away. I used to really enjoy KF's posts and his view on things, but now we have to wade through all the poop from the shoe.
It really maked me want to just stop coming to the site. Hopefuully, in the fall when junior high school starts again, she will have to be in school and not have time to post.

It really maked me want to just stop coming to the site.

The decision is yours. Nothing stopping you from leaving. You are only another anonymous nobody.

Alright, I've had it.

6:42, EVERY JJ reader is important. No one here is a "nobody".

Not sure why it has been so volatile around here lately, (actually I do, but that's another comment I've been refraining from..) but I've had it with this new, constant, unwarranted, insulting toward the JJ readers recently..along with the continual reminders to just "leave". No one needs to go anywhere.

I don't carry much (or any) weight around here, and we've all joked around and jacked with each other on here from time to time, but there comes a point where I have to step in and kindly ask that you stop telling the readers to "just go away then" at every turn. I care too much about our JJ following. (Why do I suddenly feel like Patrick Swayze.."Nobody puts Baby in a corner." ;-) )

But anyway, sure hope the atmosphere will get back to being a little more pleasant than as of late.

Anonymous, yes, because it's easy. Nobody? Maybe, but the readers are what makes this site, and any site, work. Especially blogs like this. When amateurish writers show up and begin to delute the validity of what KF has always tried to do, then you have to question why in the hell she was brought on board. I, for one, think she is bad for the site. She also likes to publish herself as anonymous, too.

I still want to know what on earth is a shoegirl? I have nothing for, or against, her assuming it is a she; just what is a shoegirl?

10:36, A shoegirl is a girl who likes shoes. Probably sounds redundant to men!

10:49, ...or even some women who have more pressing concerns. Anyway thanks for the info; I like to be as knoewledgable as the next person.

KF, can you dig just a little on something? There's a comment on another site that states, "the estate and chancery court lawyer, Mr. Bell, is actually the Country Club of Jackson's attorney in the liability case."

Any way you can find out if this is true? Sure would answer-so who's paying the bill now AND why.

Bell does not represent the CCJ.

Thanks for checking, KF. Appreciate you.

Isn't Bell's wife Karen Irby's best friend? Maybe he just wants to get some spot light out of this situation.

Everyone feels the most concern for the children which they should. All I can say is Karen Irby had a nanny. As a matter of fact, she had several nannies along with a mother, who loved her being married to Stuart. She got a car and not telling what else. There is no telling how much time she spent AWAY from the children doing her own thing while leaving the care of the children with the paid help. She had her cake and ate it too. Plus, Karen has an X husband who also cared for their daughter. He had the girl that night of the wreck. So who was home with the baby - maybe the nanny or her mother. So, the small child is used to others caring for him. Sure, he will miss his mother but I'm sure he will get to see her for visitations. It might add up to the exact amount of time she spent with him before the accident. She probably didn't spend much alone time anyway.

Mr. Bell has an excellent reputation. Every lawyer I know that knows him speaks very highly of him. Trust me, his practice doesn't need the spotlight, he has more clients than he can handle already.

I'm of the opinion seeing the comments here, WOW; An honest attorney. I'm not gonna tear him down, but I have to ask, why stake his reputation? The forces in the mainstream are working against him. If he is doing this for the right reasons, I commend you Mr. Bell. If its to represent a woman that is a victim, I think, well, she did kill two people. If its anything other than that, why?

Isn't Bell's wife the best friend of Karen Irby?

Yep, William C. Bell, wife Jana Bell. Karen Irby's very close friend. Now you know the reason for the appeal. Hasn't enough of the taxpayer's hard earned money gone to this case and now they are costing us more money. She plead guilty, she was driving the car, she was over the legal limit to drive. Karen Irby isn't a creditable person anyway and this just is a waste of our monies.

Can you find out if he is representing her free or is he seeking Stuart Irby to pay for him too?

Does a bear shit in the woods?

only if he can find a squirrel to wipe his ass....

Kingfish wrote: "Mr. Bell has an excellent reputation. Every lawyer I know that knows him speaks very highly of him. Trust me, his practice doesn't need the spotlight, he has more clients than he can handle already."

That's funny, Kingfish b/c every attorney that I know says he is a bottom feeder trying to make a name for himself... just trying any way he can to get his name in the paper and the news. He's not too smart or he would have found a better client to represent!

every attorney you know, huh. such a high school comment.

KF-didn't know if you'd be interested. Ms Supreme Court-Karen Irby v. State of Mississippi, Petition for Recusal filed by Karen Irby is denied. To Deny: All Justices. Order entered.