Stuart M. Irby Sr. filed a response yesterday in Hinds County Chancery Court to the lawsuit filed by Gayle Lang, his mother-in-law, seeking visitation rights to the son of Karen and Stuart. The answer contains several interesting claims and facts:
1. Stuart has sole physical and legal custody of said minor child (Hmmm.... one question one could see being asked is Mr. Irby mentally competent to handle said custody.).
2. Mr. Irby "emphatically denies he has unreasonably denied visitation rights with Graham as Ms. Lang claimed. Mr. Irby further states he has gone to great "effort and expense" to allow Ms. Lang to see her grandson even though Ms. Lang has "repeatedly expressed and demonstrated great hostility" towards the Irbys.
3. Karen Irby is allowed to have visitors every other Sunday from 8:00 Am to 12:00 PM. "Stuart has made arrangements for Graham to visit with Karen at each and every available opportunity. Graham also visits with Petitioner during this same four hour period."
4. One of JJ's commentors got it right a few weeks ago about Stuart's whereabouts because on page four the answer states Mr. Irby is enrolled in a neurological treatment facility in Benton, Arkansas. Mr. Irby entered the facility on July 7, 2010.
5. Mr. Irby's brother, Joe, and his wife, Diane, are caring for Graham. Graham has lived there since May 27, 2010.
6. Mr. Irby executed a power of attorney to his best friend, Jeff Rickels. The answer doesn't say anything about hockey pucks.
7. Mr. Irby gave Gayle several periods during the summer, two to four days each, during which she could have overnight visitation with Graham.
8. Graham is now attending "pre-school in Arkansas."
9. The answer begins to get a little nasty on page six as it makes some rather unflattering claims about Ms. Lang. "In spite of the efforts made by Stuart and his family and friends to facilitate visitation with Gayle, Gayle has embarked on a course of conduct designed to poison Graham against his father, his Irby family, and his time in Little Rock. The answer claims little Graham said "Daddy is not going to let me see my mommy anymore" after one visit with his grandmother. Little Graham made more comments: "Nanna is going to get a judge to say I don't have to go to Little Rock", "Why is my daddy paying you (to Stuart's lawyer)", "there is nothing to do in Little Rock", "I don't have any friends in Little Rock", and Nanna said I don't have to go to Super-Hero training camp (Ok, I'll bite. Where can I go to one of those. I want to learn to be a super-hero. Already got my hammer and helmet picked out and polished.).
The response naturally claims little Graham is having fun in Little Rock and has enjoyed being with Joe and Diane (Note to Mr. Roberts: You should have included a line about how it is to be expected such a change in circumstances (Suddenly no parents and new surroundings) will involve some confusion and possible adverse feelings in a five-year old and such is to be expected. No serious person is going to think such a child in such a situation isn't going to exhibit some anti-social or troubled behavior. Might as well admit the obvious.).
7. Mr. Irby is will file a motion for summary judgment with accompanying affidavit and asks for sanctions, as well as attorney's fees and court costs against Ms. Lang. Richard Roberts is representing Mr. Irby.
This is obviously a sad situation for everyone. One hates seeing court fights such as this one because either way its resolved, its the child who will suffer through hurt feelings and prolonged fights. An innocent little five year old child, who had nothing to do with anything, suddenly finds himself without a mom and a few weeks later, a dad. His father is obviously still recovering from the wreck. Some hard decisions have to be made concerning his care and education. One also has to consider the comments he will be subjected to on future school playgrounds (your mom's a killer, nya nya nya). There are bound to be feelings rubbed raw even further regardless of efforts made or not made. One can only hope this is resolved in favor of little Graham and that he is not a chip used by either side. Copy of answer, Earlier post
Note: Jessica Larshe of Fox40 to plagiarize in 3....2....1.....
Friday, August 20, 2010
Stuart Irby responds to mother-in-law, calls her behavior inexcusable.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
30 comments:
Does she plagiarize or borrow without attribution?
I realize this issue involves the little boy, but where is Karen's daughter? With her ex-husband?
If so, not only is little Graham Irby separated from his parents, he is separated from his sister.
My heart breaks for these children.
Richard Roberts didn't spell little Graham's name right. It's Graham READ Irby.
Other child is with her ex-husband, his wife, and two cavalier king charles spaniels. Its a bad situation no matter how you slice it.
Yes, her daughter is with her natural father.
Prayer for Graham and give praise that Karen's daughter is now safely away from that abuser.
Fox 40, my 601 will probably not plagiarize, they will shuffle the story around so that they get it wrong and then give you no attribution.
I thought divorce was tough on kids. This certainly takes the cake. As I said in the previous post on this issue...
Most normal folks would NEVER go to these lengths unless it was so acrimonious that it required these actions.
1. Mom in jail for 18 years.
2. Dad in rehab learning to cope with new reality
3. Stable family in another town providing a stable environment.
4. Loving Nanna pissed off.
5. Nanna and Stuart acting like children
This kid right now needs to be in the most stable environment and from the looks of things it is *currently*, given the sad turn of events, with the family presently caring for him.
Let Nanna and Stuart fight it out in court away from the kid. In fact, the court ought to revoke both their privileges until the two of them can act in a manner that BENEFITS the child. This is some crazy stuff.
And on another note. The previous filing was really just a shot over the bow. Didn't describe any specifics of how Nanna is being denied visitation, perhaps these details may emerge shortly? And, I'm just assuming here, but the original filing looked to me she was going the legal route to "establish" visitation, not necessarily attack SI.
Maybe stuff like this doesn't need to be posted at all. I know it is public record, but to have a custody battle over an innocent 5 year old put out in the public domain invites trouble. Criminal, yeah...fair game. But I think this is too much information, none of our business and very unfair to Graham.
I think the grandmother is pursuing this because of her daughter, Karen, and her grandson, Graham. Neither Karen nor Graham have any control over this mess at this point so granny has to be the one to act.
As far as Stuart Irpy, I believe it is as it has always been with him...all about Stuart.
That a brain-damaged, vindictive man approaching 60 years old would even consider himself worthy of raising a small boy is telling.
His actions make me believe that it is all about possessing what he feels is his property. If he loved Graham as a father should, he would never put this child through the life-changing situations he has so far.
It is bad enough that the child lost his mother and his home, but to lose his sister and granny also, tells me that Stuart can't relate to what this small boy must be feeling inside, nor does he appear to care.
11:09 AM Do you lend any credence to the statements that the Nanna is putting in that poor kids head?
Let this child alone and let him stay with his grandmother for heavens sake.Hope the Judge is grandparents to lots of grand children and understands what old Stu is up to, crazy bastard, oopps said a bad word but grands are somtime like that.
I would think being in a stable home with his Aunt and Uncle- even though they unfortuntaley live in Arkansas is better than being alone with Grandma. It's not like he has the option to live with his Sister! She is with her father. At least they can provide a somewhat "normal" home environment.
Sounds like Stuart Irby is doing evrything to protect his son.
Nana seems like a witch.
Can't a guardian be appointed by the court to represent the CHILD's best interest?
One has to wonder if what is written is actually what was said.
What the attorney said the five year old asked and stated may have been no more than what the boy's young mind INTERPRETED from something someone said. Graham's mind must be filled with questions about what is going on around him
Of course he is scared and probably feels abandoned by life as he knew it for the most part.
Therefore he might be trying to find answers by asking and saying things that Stuart and his attorney are interpreting to mean something they don't.
Or the Nanna is being vindictive towards her son-in-law and no better than SI in trying to use the child as a pawn.
No execuse for either of them.
Or Or Or....im just kidding...I've got nothing.
Well, except that Graham needs some stability- the poor INNOCENT child. His mom is as unstable as a lifetime movie- even before the wreck. The apple doesn't fall too far from the tree either, so it really is best if he goes away with the "good irby's'.
I just wish they would leave that poor kid alone. He is going to have more problems when he gets older because of all this crap.
The whole things just sucks, and actually, I am tired of the Irby name.
August 20, 2010 3:30 PM...I have seen judges allow the parental rights of a crackhead mom and not grant custody to the father until she was in jail. Since SI is the father, I doubt seriously the courts will grant custody to Nana unless SI is really screwed up, (he's screwed up allright, but not enough from what I have seen).
Sorry, wrong post. But Nanna looks nuts FWIW.
Unfortunatly things like this happen all the time. It just happens that the people involved in this case are a little more high profile, so Kingfish has been able to share it with the blog. Nanna may actually be trying to establish vistitation for the purpose of giving Karen the opportunity to visit with Graham. If Nanna gets to see Graham every other weekend then she can take Graham to see his Mom. I am assuming here that if you checked Karen's visitation list her Mom would be listed more than anyone else. Regardless of the situation, both Graham and Karen need to see each other and be in contact with each other. The fact that the lawyers reduce it to a nasty art is just they way it is.
who gives a rat's ass. there are no allegations of abuse or neglect. run a story about some kids who really need help.
By way of your insight, I wonder.... Do your kids need help? You are quick to deflect reported facts that folks of stature should know better. Are you better or are you the very poison?
the 12:30 comment was directed at 10:19pm
12:30: Amen!
Could someone who has seen or knows Stuart Irby comment on his health? Is it obvious from seeing him or talking to him that something is mentally wrong with him? Is his condition so bad that it will probably not improve? I'm just trying to get some idea if he will be able ever to take care of his small child. Seems to me Graham needs a count appointed guardian to help decide his best interests if his Dad can't.
Granny loves and cares her grandson. She wants to be sure that she and her family and especially his sister continue to get to spend time with him, and more importantly, she wants to make sure the child always gets to see his Mother. Right now there is no guarantee this is happening or that it will continue to happen. Granny is just making sure Graham always gets to spend time with his Mother and her family.
Sounds to me like Graham is in a good, loving family situation, and while he is probably confused now about what all has happened, he will adjust and as time goes by, he will be OK.
Tragic doesn't even begin to describe this situation for all.
He is a brain damaged sociopath, selfish before, now uninhibited.
What happens to the marriage b/w 2 people when one is put behind bars, such as Karen? I assume these 2 are still legally married and Karen has a say in where her son is raised.
As far as the grandparents rights, it appears that Stuart is allowing Gayle to visit Graham and be a part of his life, if the answer/response is the truth, which I believe it is.
Well, it's not. And he's not.
Post a Comment