Jackson Jambalaya

A Madison County Grand Jury indicted Stuart M. Irby, Sr. on July 7, 2011 for cyberstalking Lee Bounds.





The indictment states Mr. Irby "willfully, unlawfully, maliciously, and feloniously cyberstalk Lee Bounds by electronically mailing or electronically communicating to another and knowingly making any false statement concerning indecent conduct of Hannah Bounds, the daughter of Lee Bounds, with the intent to threaten, terrify, or harass Lee Bounds, in violation of Miss. Code Ann. Section 97-45-15(1)(c).."

Such a violation is a felony if convicted and carries a penalty of "(a)Except as provided herein, the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than two (2) years or a fine of not more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00), or both. "

That was the news portion, now for the informed commentary part of this post. Lee Bounds is the ex-husband of Karen Irby. These two men know each other- well. In fact, Mr. Bounds sued Mr. Irby for alienation of affection in 2004. The case settled in 2005. There is a history of animosity between these two men. Several sources have informed JJ what took place was the Irby family went to the King Edward hotel for Sunday brunch. Mr. Bounds was invited to bring his family, which he did. Mr. Irby took pictures and Mr. Bounds daughter was one of those photographed. Apparently Mr. Irby learned how to photoshop a few months ago and thinks its pretty funny to photoshop his friends' faces on other bodies like the Hulk, swimsuit models, and the like. He took the daughter's face (who is seventeen) and photoshopped it on some swimsuit models and emailed the pictures to Mr. Bounds supposedly as a joke. Unfortunately for Mr. Irby, the girl's mother is a Madison (city) police officer.

However, several questions must be asked about this prosecution. Why was the Madison Police investigating this incident as it involved one of their own police officers? Standard procedure would have been for the Madison PD to hand the case off to another law enforcement agency such as the Madison County Sheriff's Office. JJ obtained a copy of the police report several months ago but did not publish it because there are serious doubts about is veracity. The police report repeatedly claims Mr. Irby cyberstalked the minor. JJ had already done some digging on the case and learned the facts posted above. The report was not posted as I had a serious question as to whether it was slanderous as cyberstalking a minor is considered much worse than sending a tasteless or crude email to a grown man and I did not want to publish a police report containing false statements. The indictment was more accurate than the original complaint, police report, and media coverage were as it stated Mr. Irby contacted Mr. Bounds, not his daughter. Big difference. Big, huge difference.

I am pointing this out because here is what the media said back then about the case:

WJTV on March 22, 2011: "We also found out that Irby sent the 17 year old girl in the cyberstalking case an email 2 hours after he made bond."

WAPT headline on March 3, 2011: "Stuart Irby accused of cyberstalking 17-year-old."

WAPT after Mr. Irby's DUI arrest: "Earlier this month, Irby was charged in Madison and accused of cyberstalking a 17-year old girl." and this comment on the WAPT website: "House arrest?...after he recently bonded out for cyberstalking a SEVENTEEN year old.. but his recent behavior he has displayed a has "drunk pervert" written all over it....Smart men don't get drunk and chase teenagers, they get help.."

Then there are is this Clarion-Ledger story on March 4, 2011: "Stuart M. Irby, whose wife is serving an 18-year manslaughter sentence in connection with a fatal accident in which both were injured, is accused of cyberstalking a minor." and of course the infamous comments on the newspaper's website:



















Just one problem with all of these headlines and comments: Mr. Irby is accused in the indictment of cyberstalking his wife's ex-husband, not a minor. Does anyone think any these media outlets will clarify their original reporting? WAPT didn't. WJTV: No mention of indictment at all. Fox40: nothing. Clarion-Ledger: Reports indictment and Mr. Irby contacts Mr. Bounds but no correction or clarification. If it indeed comes out at trial Mr. Irby never contacted or cyberstalked the minor child, one would think the Madison PD and some media outlets are going to have some explaining to do in a courtroom one day.

Cyberstalking a minor child is a very serious crime on several levels. There is the penalty aspect of the crime. Even worse is the social stigma. One convicted of such a crime is forever seen by society as a pervert or a modern day leper. If it can be shown Mr. Irby committed a crime, by all means prosecute and convict him. However, do not smear him with news stories and comments claiming he is cyberstalking minors and is some kind of pervert.

Then there is the matter of actually convicting Mr. Irby. Its going to be very hard to prove there was an intent or element of malice. Mr. Irby suffered severe brain trauma. Anyone who has seen him or talked to him can tell he is "not right in the head". He is no longer allowed to manage his affairs. Then there is the matter of the relationship between the complainant and defendant. There has been litigation and other conflict between the two men over the years. Mr. Bounds is much younger than Mr. Irby, is much bigger than Mr. Irby, and knows his mental state. Most fathers would have either chewed out Mr. Irby or knocked his block off for a tasteless email about their daughters, not run to an ex-wife who just happens to be a cop and dig up charges to file. Of course, the question must also be asked if the complaint is predicate to a........ civil lawsuit. The trial in November should be very interesting.