Karen Irby filed a suit in Hinds County Circuit Court Friday seeking damages Charles Irby (brother), Stuart M. Irby, Jr. (son), Joe Irby (brother), Cal Wells (Irby friend and attorney), Richard Montague (attorney), Dr. Shaduker Madakasira, and Jeff Rickles (friend). Ms. Irby charges them with alienation of affection, conspiracy, and fraud after they allegedly gained control of his affairs, divorced the couple, and then changed his will to deprive her of her and her child's inheritance in the case of his death. Mr. Irby killed himself January 17, 2011. The lawsuit also seeks punitive damages and was filed by attorneys Dennis Sweet and Bill Featherston. Ms. Irby also included her daughter by Lee Bounds, Parker, as a co-plaintiff.
Ms. Irby states she and Stuart Irby (First names will be used as there are so many Irby's.) were married on June 11, 2005 and maintained a "close confidential relationship involving love, affection, mutual trust, co-mingling of substantial property, philanthropy, and the like." The complaint states "they were considered local celebrities because of their success, kindness, and generosity." Stuart Sr. signed and executed his will on November 14, 2007 (The will is posted below on p.19.). It should be noted Mr. Irby filed a divorce petition against Karen in 2009. A Hinds County Chancellor dismissed the petition after Karen was never served. Karen charged Stuart Sr. in 2007 and 2008 with simple assault. He was not convicted of either charge.
The will was very generous. Stuart Sr. bequeathed $4 million at the time of his death if they had been married for five year. The will also left the house on 3940 Stuart Place to Karen. He also left $1 million to his sister and $100,000 to each of his brothers.
An interesting aspect of the 2007 will is it leaves additional money to Karen but with conditions. It states "Is I am married to Karen Collins Irby and we have not separated and are living together at the time of my death and neither of us has instituted any action for separation... divorce" then Karen receives an additional $200,000 and another $100,000 for each year of marriage through the fifth year of marriage, then $150,000 a year until the 8th year, then $50,000 for the ninth year, and a maximum of $1.2 million.
The will finally leaves $1 million to the step-daughter, Parker. However, Parker would not get half the money until she turned 35 years old and the other half when she reached the age of 50. The will left $8 million for his then two-year old son Graham Irby with the same provisions for when he was to receive his inheritance as Parker. The will then leaves a substantial amount of money to various causes and charities.
The lawsuit states Stuart executed the will and Karen "was entitled, and expected, to receive a significant inheritance-and of course his family and several charities were entitled to receive substantial bequeaths."
The lawsuit then unsheathed the dagger as it addresses the wreck. Karen acknowledges the "horrific" wreck that killed two doctors and that she was charged with depraved heart murder. She states Stuart Sr. did not recover mentally and that his doctor allegedly reported his brain injury "rendered him mon compos mentis" (not of sound mind).
Karen claims one of the defendants hired attorney Joe Holloman to defend her and that she "did not have a written engagement letter" with Mr. Holloman "or any of her lawyers." She accuses the defendants of conspiring to deprive her of her inheritance and assets after she was sentenced to 18 years in jail and that Stuart Sr. "lacked the ability, as a result of his mental condition" to make a decision with a "reasonable degree of rational understanding."
Mr. Sweet moves in for the kill*: "While the Hinds County District Attorney's Office prepared to prosecute Karen and sought to interview Stuart, Stuart's personal lawyers maintained the position that he suffered infirmities and could not give competent testimony. Indeed this correspondent attended that hearing and heard his attorney state Mr. Irby could not testify and his medical condition was so severe, it would cause harm to his well-being. She stated she had a nueropsychologist ready to testify to that effect. Hinds County Circuit Judge Tomie Green ruled in September 2009:
"Irby's medical providers opine that he suffers "retrograde amnesia for events leading up to the accident "through sometime in mid-April 2009. The medical providers indicate that this is typical of persons with severe traumatic brain injury, along with multiple other cognitive, psychological, and emotional maladies. Their prognosis for memory recovery remains poor.
(3)Stuart Irby's physicians are of the opinion that he lacks the ability to participate or even comprehend and provide reliable and valid answers to questions from the State and Defendant regarding the incident at issue in this case. Moreover these treating physicians advise the Court Mr. Irby's involuntary participation in even a simple interview at this time would likely "worsen" his condition, would setback his brain injury recovery, and "cause harm" to their patient.".... Earlier post
Karen's lawyers didn't miss this at all as they wrote his "lawyers also asserted he lacked the mental capacity to give competent testimony based upon his mental infirmities associated with the February 2009 accident." Mr. Irby thus allegedly lacked the sound mind needed to make changes to a will.
Charles Irby established a conservatorship for Stuart Sr. last year after he was arrested for a DUI in Ridgeland. The complaint alleges the guardians, Charles and several other defendants, divorced the couple and then changed the wil. She argues Stuart Sr. could not "comprehend his actions" and he executed another will on May 14, 2010 (A copy was not included in the file.). She claimed Stuart still "loved" her and frequently wrote her and visited her in prison and he told the defendants he did not want to get divorced. The petition for divorce was filed on May 17, 2011.
*Editorial note: I think the episode when the D.A. was trying to question Mr. Irby will be a huge factor in this case. Stuart Sr.'s lawyer, Lisa Milner Binder, argued repeatedly to Judge Green that Mr. Irby was not mentally competent to handle a short interview. Judge Green reviewed his medical file, which included an independent review she ordered, and agreed. I wrote back then Ms. Binder's representation of Stuart Sr. was a disaster and she just made things worse. All Mr. Irby had to do was say "I don't remember" for 10 minutes, interview over but she asserted medical privilege and that he was not mentally competent to present himself. Now it looks like this will be used against him and well, the question must be asked, was he mentally competent when he executed another will in 2010?
Monday, February 27, 2012
Karen Irby sues Irby brothers, Junior, & Irby attorneys for damages
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
124 comments:
Anybody could have seen this coming. Irby's attorney was an idiot to think that they could claim that he was incompetent in this case, and the cyber stalking case, and not have someone like Dennis Sweet (Jackson's version of Jackie Chiles) see the big payoff. Can't have it both ways. Time to pay.
Wonder who's fighting over the air plane and destin condo.
I am surprised at how little money he had. I thought there would be much more $$$ to fight over.
Oh boo hoo.
She is the ONLY survivor of that wreck now.
She is out of prison having never served her entire sentence.
She is home with her kids.
What more does she need? Oh...that's right. a yacht. That will make it all better.
She also blamed Stuart for the crash labeled him as an abuser.
Shouldn't she just be grateful to have her life, freedom, and children back?
This is all disgusting and such a horrible display of greed.
Her friends and supporters can hate me, tell me to shut up, and all the other things, but the fact is that Karen has already gotten more than she deserved and she doesn't deserve another time of Irby money.
Once a gold digger, always a gold digger. The biggest compliment I can pay her is that at least she is consistent.
Perhaps one defense will be that even a crazy person could see the need to divorce Karen Irby.
1. What does "Stuart Sr. was also arrested several times by Karen." mean?
2. I don't know this woman, but, then, neither do most of you, I'm guessing. Every post about the Irby family on here seems to become a pissing contest to see who can vent self-righteously based on, at best, hearsay, rumor, and their desire to feel superior to people who've had public failures. I hope you never have people speculating on the intimate aspects of your life. I'm not saying you're wrong, or that they're right, but get off your moral high horse. (And, yes, I recognize the hypocrisy implicit in making such a statement here, anonymously, in which I impune the motives and character of people I don't know. Ain't the internet grand?)
100% agree Rebekah. If Karen had the best interest of her children at heart then she would be more concerned with keeping their names out of the paper and NOT dragging them into any of this. She should be grateful to have her freedom and be happy to live a simple life and fade off into the sunset. Alas it looks as though her time in prison did not change her at all. Her number one motive is still greed. (PS I smell Grandma Gayle's hands in all this too. It was well known that Stuart supported her financially as well.)
If he was "not of sound mind" then the Irby's broke the law and she and her child/children are entitled to whatever he left to her in the first will. It sounds to me like the Irby's are the greedy ones.
Question...If an individual is declared by a court to be non compos mentis...and then a conservatorship is established and authorized to make decisions on his behalf...how valid and binding are the decisions that the conservators make?
February 27, 2012 2:37 PM I agree.
As if this entire thing wasn't sad enough from all angles, now comes the I-want-money angle. Sick. Sad and sick.
So, was the civil suit by the victims' families closed? Or can they reopen it now if the criminal gets assets to attach?
In addition to Jeff Rickles being a friend, he had Power of Attorney over Stuart's affairs while he was living.
All right, guy that just made comment, take out one sentence and I approve it. You know which one. was near the end.
This whole situation is just sad.
Goes to show that money can't buy you happiness, and in some cases- can create more problems than it's worth.
I feel sorry for all the children involved. Including the two grown children he had from his first marriage.
Rebeka and Momto2:
You've heard the old saying that leopards don't change their spots, right?
Why on earth would you be surprised that she wants to score as much as possible? I'm sure that in her mind she IS doing what's in the best interest of her kids. If she happens to be able to live the life she chased so hard, so much the better.
3:21: If you think the Irby's are doing anything for greed, you're an idiot. They don't need the money. I would imagine that they are trying to keep someone who has caused so much upheaval in their siblings life from profiting from this.
What's the deal? Is she on house arrest or not? She's been seen in public with her ex husband. She is no celebrity. Haha on the "local celebrity" statement. I wish she'd go the hell away-she doesn't deserve one cent.
Rebekah typically speaks from her ovaries, allowing emotion to guide her every word. If the Irby lady was screwed out of money, she has every legal right to regain control of it, regardless of the moans coming from the buzzard brigade.
I don't speak from my ovaries asshole. It makes me mad because the Irby's were (are) a VERY hard working family. They earned that money. All Karen did was get pregnant and spend it.
I speak how I see it and I speak the truth- she does not deserve another dime. If she is so worried about her two children then get a job and stay out of the damn media. Both kids have been through hell and back. For ONCE, she needs to put her damn children first and stopbeing so selfish and greedy.
I, at one time, felt sorry for her from one mother to another. Those feelings have vanished.
She didn't just walk away empty handed and most people know how much she got. Is it enough for Velma to come back and raise her kids and wash her clothes? No. Will it give her the Country Club lifestyle again? Probably not.
But, what it will bring her is another chance at life and a new beginning with her children.
For most people, that would be enough.
What is next after her story appears on WAPT WEd night?? Her own spinoff show on Bravo? The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills have nothing on this woman
She is also capable of working. She's still young and can earn her own money. Her son will be taken care of, but her daughter is her responsibility, not the Irby's.
She should be able to travel to work even though she is under house arrest. I'm sure the Irby's have everything set up the correct way to protect their assets from Karen or at least I hope they do.
Rebekah typically speaks from her ovaries
Leaving us to wonder what body part YOU are speaking out of, dumbass.
February 27, 2012 2:53 PM = Troll
We can't really blame Karen for spewing this crap all over the media, can we? She does not generate the news stories or the blog comments. WE do.
Rebecca just wants a new ride and is pissed nobody will come forth.
Poor Stuart...he cannot get out of the press even after he offs himself.
I thought the whole point of having a conservator put into place was to assist the guardian with asset allocation and the like. It seems far fetched to me that a Chancery Court Judge's appointment of a conservator, and the conservator's actions (i.e. estate planning sans murderous wifey) can be challenged IF all the rules were followed.
This is bogus, IMO.
Since she agreed to their divorce and took a property settlement as part of the divorce proceeding, I think she is probably estopped to now assert that her husband was incompetent to participate in legal proceedings, or to have his conservator participate on his behalf. In other words, having received the benefits from a divorce in which she voluntarily participated without raising the incompetency issue at that time, I don't think she can raise it now. Also, it would be interesting to know if changes to his will were specified in the divorce - it is not uncommon for a divorce settlement to state that the spouses are writing each other out of their wills or to make specific provisions for the wills as part of the property settlement, particularly if children are involved. If that is the case here, then I think she does not have much of a case.
I suspect there may be many details here that she did not advise her attorneys of while they were drafting this lawsuit.
This southern soap opera just will not end ! I am expecting the script at some point to have Stuart reappear and the hanging was some sort of trick.
This southern soap opera just will not end ! I am expecting the script at some point to have Stuart reappear and the hanging was some sort of trick.
What's the big deal? This is simple: either he was competent to change the will or he was not.
If he was not competent to change the will, then it needs to be set aside.
Stuart Irby's mental condition was much worse than just "incompetent." He was found to be suffering from such a severe mental condition that he was even unable to differentiate between right and wrong.
Does that sound like someone who possessed the mental competence to amend his will?
Very, very good point 7:01
White people's problems.
Interesting new comment format; doesn't change anything except your perspective from my point of view.
REb, you are on target. I do not understand how a convicted felon can have the opportunity to regain rights under the circumstances. Even if there was favoritism for a commutation, even if there was a favor for a favor, even if the greed that doesn't seem to stop still goes on; she can still do it.
I figure, I don't have to live that life. I figure those who want, those who will benefit, those who will take some unknown position of "she deserves it"; oh well. I hope that I do not have to swell in those circles.
Reb you are right. Forgive us all for ever having paid attention to this tragedy.
IT is more like Real Housewife's Gulf Coast... that fits.... You can give a girl money but it doesn't buy her any class. Three people dead all from he actions. It doesn't seem she has any remorse and self respect to continue to be a public joke. It was funny how they said SHE was a public figure....that is all she wanted or why would she have "done everything to get pregnant" That is a quote of her btw. Let the truth be known.
She fell 4 months short of 7 years, which I believe is a milestone, of pretty much, nothing. Get to 10 years, then we can talk.
"her"? actons? Patti Benton doesn't smell this bad. She at a minimum love's her celebrity.
The lawsuit is styled Karen Collins (Irby). With Irby in parentheses, does that mean she is dropping the Irby name in favor of her maiden name?
Curt, what can a conservator do with the assets of the ward? If a conservator cannot alter the distribution of assets...what good is a conservator?
For all you people that keep harping about "why is she out about town when she is supposed to be under house arrest" You need to educate yourself as to what house arrest is. You can go to work, church, shopping and anything else your house arrest officer says you can do. The only people that look dumb here is you people making those uninformed comments.
4:27--My point exactly. The Irby's didn't need the money...but from all appearances they just didn't want Karen or her children to get it. Conservatorship does not give you the right to change someone's will, only to manage their affairs. And...if I recall correctly, it wasn't only Karen that sullied the Irby name. I think that Stuart also had a lot to do with dragging the Irby name through the mud.
3 Dead people-all about money- just makes the word EVIL stick in my mind. MONEY is the root of all evil. Boy, the public opinion poll should go up on your site....
7:22, a conservator's job is to manage the ward's assets during his lifetime. The conservator is there to prevent the assets from being dissipated by the ward's incompetent actions, and ultimately to protect the ward from leaving himself penniless.
It is not the conservator's job to go back and undo testimentary decisions as to disposition of property that the ward made before becoming incompetent. That property would be transferred only upon the ward's death. At that point, the ward no longer needs protecting because he is deceased.
She signed the DIVORCE PAPERS. What, do you think you retain rights to marital property when you WILLING SIGN.
I think the focus should be on their child.
If Karen will be raising him, he should enjoy the lifestyle he would have enjoyed had none of this tragedy ever happened.
The fine points of divorce law should matters less than this child's best interest . I would hope that, however much the Irby's dislike or blame Karen, they will not want Stuart's son to suffer because his mother can't care for him as she would have otherwise.
And, that includes being able to be a " stay at home mother" and maintaining a comfortable economic status.
It will not be good for the boy to feel his mother is being ill treated by his other family members. She is half of who he is. You shouldn't make children feel half of their genetics is "bad" or that they are less worthy of family status because of one parent.
He shouldn't be put in the middle of family tugs of war. None of this was his fault.
8:42- Money is NOT the root of all evil. The LOVE of money is the root of all evil.
People may have negative thoughts about Karen and her seeking the money she thinks she deserves from the Will Stuart signed before the wreck and divorce, but dont forget Charles Irby loves money and makes Karen seem innocent and nice in many peoples eyes. His control over Stuart (sick or not) and the Will being changed after he was declared not of his right mine is fishy to me. Charles is a much bigger snake than Karen.
Fascinating. How can such sophisticated people make such a mess? You would think a court would have signed off on any change in a will....
Get your popcorn out.
9:20am: You believe Karen should be made whole again by reverting back to the status afforded to her as an Irby. Things changed through the fault of her own actions when she drove a vehicle at exceedingly high speeds, while drunk on alcohol. Her wreckless behavior killed an innocent young couple who had a blissful life before them. Karen was sentenced to prison for the crime only to find herself on house arrest a short time later. Within days of her release, her son's daddy committed suicide. More to the point, why should the Irby's provide her with a lavish lifestyle of leisure when her careless disregard for others shines like a beacon in the night?
10:13am obviously knows nothing about Charles Irby. Are you freakin' kidding me?
A person who causes the death of a person cannot inherit from the victim, regardless of whether the will is otherwise valid.
Has anyone looked into who got her pardoned? It wasn't the Irby's.
She didn't cause Stuart Irby's death..it was suicide.
The defendants in this lawsuit bear some scrutiny:
Charles Irby,individually and as co-conservator
Joe Irby, individually and as co-conservator
Stuart Jr., individually and as co-conservator
Doctor(neurologist?), individually and as employee/shareholders of Psycamore, LLC (his clinic?)
Jeff Rickels, individually, as Senior VP of Pinnacle Trust Company, LLC, and as co-conservator
T. Calvin Wells, individually and as employee/shareholder of Wells Moore Simmons Edwards & Wilbanks, PLLC
Richard Montague, individually, as employee/shareholder of Wells Moore Simmons Edwards & Wilbanks, PLLC, and as co-conservator
Pinnacle Trust Company, LLC
Wells Moore Simmons Edwards & Wilbanks, PLLC
Psycamore, LLC
John Does 1-20
Curt is right. They can't have it both ways. I doubt any of us here knows the facts but I predict that the insurance carriers for that august group of defendants will either deny the claim or either vomit when they look at this scenario and quickly reach a settlement, because this lawsuit has serious legs! It is the perfect storm!
So I guess you think he got brain injury all by himself. No, she killed two people and almost killed him. So, due to her, his life was ruined. And who knows what that last conversation with her was all about. and if it was anything like the other conversation she had him it was torture. 3 lives taken by this woman who has greed in her heart.
11:59 am You have missed the point entirely.
I am not talking about making Karen whole and certainly not about enriching her. I am talking about making her son with Stuart as whole as possible.
There is no fixing the past. But, this kid's life was adversely affected through no fault of his own. There is nothing to be gained by making his mother pay at his expense.
There is surely a reasonable compromise here where he doesn't pay for the sins of others.
The focus of ALL the adults involved should be the child.
9:20am & 12:16am: No. Your point was not entirely missed. In fact, you suggest laws to be suspended: "The fine points of divorce law should matters(sic) less than this child's best interest." As far as the child's genetics being "bad" just for this precious child to live with the stigma that his mother almost killed his father and possesses a felony conviction for killing two people are facts no amount of money will correct. The lives of people can change on a dime. The innocent child's life was forever changed that horrific February evening when two people were heard screaming from pain and horror while trapped inside their fiery vehicle.
Too bad the focus wasn't on the CHILD when they were left at home while the Irby's went to JCC that night and many more!
All right, the kids are off-limits. Period.
I drove by that curve and hour before the wreck with my young daughter in a truck similar to the doctors'. I refer to that curve as the Karen Irby murder Curve. I think of it as I travel by several times per day. The best description I have heard of her is Depraved Heart. It is so fitting. She should be in jail where she belongs.
If she didn't put the rope around his neck, she didn't kill him. Yes, she killed 2 innocent people. I doubt very seriously that she intended for that to happen, but that's beside the point. Haley let her out and so that's that. She said he was beating her in the car. If that was true then he has blood on his hands also. He wasn't able to defend himself on that charge but if his past behavior is any indications, that could quite possibly be the truth. The facts of the matter are that if he was not of sound mind, he could not have "legally" changed the will. It doesn't matter what she did or didn't do. All that matters is that the law was broken when his will was changed. There is plenty of blame to be spread around with this soap opera.
If stuart was of sound mind and could have written karen out of
his current will, then I believe it is logical to assume that his
conservators could do the same.
For example, if stuart was of sound mind and made a binding agreement to pay money at a future date, then if he could change it, his conservators couldn't change it. but if stuart made a non-binding agreement to pay money at a future date, then I would think he (or conservators) dould freely change the agreement.
For example, if stuart was of sound mind and made a binding agreement to pay money at a future date, and if he could NOT change it, his conservators couldn't change it either.
but if stuart made a non-binding agreement to pay money at a future date, then I would think he (or conservators) dould freely change the agreement.
correction to my earlier post
Stuart could have changed Stuart's will at any time, so long as he was competent when he did it.
However, I haven't found any statutory authority that authorizes a conservator to re-write or amend a will that was validly executed while the ward was competent.
Can you imagine the chicanery that would take place if conservators were allowed to re-write wards' wills just because the conservator wants the will to say something different?
Again, I go back to this point - were changes to the will addressed in the divorce settlement between the parties? If they were, then I think she cannot assert claims now, since she voluntarily agreed to the divorce settlement. I would be really, really surprised if the will issues were not addressed in the divorce.
Total speculation here, but if she was expecting alimony and/or child support from her ex-husband to carry her financially, then that went up in smoke when Mr. Irby died, since I don't believe his estate will be responsible to continue making those payments unless that was clearly spelled out in the divorce settlement. If that is the case, then asserting these claims may be her way of trying to get that money another way. I do not believe she will be successful in this, but maybe she can sue her divorce lawyer next for malpractice . . . .
All that language about X amount after five yrs and and performance bonus for subsequent yrs of service, sounds more like pre-nup terms than a 'will'
Feb 28, 2012 8:19AM- thank you Karen Irby for clearing that up.
Becca you married fairly well too did you not? What is it you do for a living again? You ever drive Old Canton Rd in NE Jackson after a full night of "grape therapy"? God forbid...just sayin'. Everyone can see where I'm going with this...thou shalt not judge, nor cast stones within glass houses. Count your lucky stars lady...
you said "performance bonus"
"subsequent years of service"
heh heh
heh heh
has the new will been submitted for probate? has a will contest been commenced? It would be interesting to see if anyone's inheritance went up after the two were disinherited. if not, i guess they'll have two dozen charities trying to intervene in chancery court.
does she at least get to keep the musical instruments that the kids don't want?
Give me a minute, I'm running out of popcorn...
BBL!
Rebekah IS working. She is very involved in her son's life and has another one on the way. She doesn't push her child off to a nanny every day and night. I'd bet you $10,000 she'd be doing the same even if she wasn't blessed enough to be a stay at home mother. Raising kids is the hardest job in the world.
Rebekah IS working. She is very involved in her son's life and has another one on the way. She doesn't push her child off to a nanny every day and night. I'd bet you $10,000 she'd be doing the same even if she wasn't blessed enough to be a stay at home mother. Raising kids is the hardest job in the world.
10:59 AM - Yes being a mother and raising children is hard - it is twice as hard when a full time job is involved. Or do you think women that have to work full time aren't good mothers?
11:39 I don't why people want to put words in someone's mouth. Yes, some women have to work. A lot of those mothers are good mothers as well. That wasn't really the point of my statement.
10:59 AM - You seem awfully defensive, dare I say ma'am?? You didn't give Becca a chance to answer, nor did you address the real points within my post...tsk, tsk
Just because they used the word "not competent" regarding Stuart giving his testimony doesn't mean he wasn't "competent" to execute his will. Competence to testate a will is a very broad standard. Even legally insane people can have the required competence to execute a will. A person cannot have "competence" to testify regarding a certain event, but then have the required competence to execute a will.
I think Sweet and Co. will have a hard time proving Stuart, who could walk, talk, drive, etc., did not have the competence to execute a will.
"Becca" here...of course, usually only friends refer to me as that.
Being a good mother- whether you stay home or you work outside the home- is a hard job. I used the word "good" because throwing your kid off to the nanny to raise or not spending anytime with your children isn't really being a good mother-regardless if you work outside the home or not. I happen to give all to my son- always have. Not saying I am perfect- I am not- but if there is one thing I can say about me is that I put my son first and I am a damn good mother. I might lack in every other department (depending on who you ask) but I am a damn good mom.
AP- "Marrying well" as you stated isn't the issue. People marry into wealthy families all of the time. But not everyone goes out looking for a rich husband.
Some people...wait for it...actually marry someone because they love and respect that person, want to raise a family with that person, and actually want to spend a lifetime with that person- regardless of income.
I count my stars and blessings everynight, AP. I do not take my life for granted. Believe me when I say I know it can be taken away at any given moment. I might not have the most interesting and gossip worthy life, but it is more than I could have ever asked for or wanted.
Now, as far as grape therapy is concerned- I made mistakes driving when I shouldn't have. Lots of people have. I think lots of people have also realized how stupid it was to do so- especially after this wreck. Being in a drunk accident could have happened to anyone. Now, I will say, I have never driven like a mad woman like she did that night- perhaps when I was 16, but not as an adult.
But, people make mistakes, AP...and they also make choices. Karen's choice that night was to drive the way she did. The consequence was the death of 2 innocent people and injurying another.
The moment she decided to blame Stuart for the wreck is the moment she lost respect...and sympathy.
Now Stuart is dead, yet she is still alive. Many people who have killed people in a DUI wreck are still doing time in prison. Karen is out. Why isn't that enough for her? Why isn't life, freedom, and her children enough. '
The thing that bothers me the most out of all of this is that she doesn't see past her greed and love of money to see that she is only hurting more innocent people- children.
I don't nor can I judge anyone. None of us can. What I can do is state my opinion, which is what everyone has the right to do.
Everyone makes mistakes...but own up to them. Don't blame anyone else for your actions.
She doesn't deserve anything else. SHe has taken enough from the Irby's...it is time to move on and start her life over.
Sorry for the long ramble everyone...
Great Case! How could he have changed his will or got a divorce if he "lacked capacity".... wasn't that his claim that he did not have the mental capacity to have committed the acts alleged in the charges in Madison County ....Hmmmm.......
So I go get popcorn and come back to a discussion about Reb? We already know she is the shiznit.
Back to Karen vultures, get on with something that is on topic, especially considering she spent one of the shortest sentences ever for taking the lives of two doctors with a depraved heart.
My popcorn needs more butter...
Yeah, butter.
I didn't think I was being that defensive. "Becca" can certainly defend herself a lot better than I can. I'm just saying what everyone else is thinking who knows the situation. Marrying someone you actually love rather than for his money. Imagine that. There's a big difference between someone driving after a couple of glasses of wine and someone driving 90 mph through a residential neighborhood after drinking. Neither is right but the latter is unacceptable.
People love to go off topic KK...I have an email if they want to send fan mail but they would rather post on here to bore everyone!!
Extra EXTRA butter for me
ANd...I am trying to remember his name so I can look up the case, but back when I was a freshman in highschool (92), a high school guy was drunk and ended up crashing into something killing a young boy...I think the boy was about 10. As far as I know, that high school guy is still in prison....makes no sense to me.
Just a question for the atty,,, isnt being sentenced to prison indisputable grounds for divorce?
Reb, funny you say that. My better half related a similar story.
In my mind a young adult is much more deserving of compassion than someone caught up in this whirlwind of shit
I mean, how many legal battles has she engaged in in the last 12 months? I don't know many people who get to that level of having the State involved in their life that much unless they are in and out of jail or dealing with DHS/Family court. Take the money out of it and it is pretty disturbing.
A teenager? At least he isn't jaded against life. He has a better chance of rehabilitation in my mind.
To 9:00PM so is being of unsound mind.
My question about prison being grounds for divorce is directed at Curt, I understand you to say that a conservator can not change a prior will, but can he
process for divorce if the spouse is in prison for 18 yr?
Mr. Irby killed himself January 17, 2011
KF
Typo error in your article.... It was 2012
10:11 PM go read and stop asking for free advice.
There is an image of Tomie sipping a hot mug of java this morning while composing her poem for this one.
AP said...
Becca you married fairly well too did you not? What is it you do for a living again? You ever drive Old Canton Rd in NE Jackson after a full night of "grape therapy"? God forbid...just sayin'. Everyone can see where I'm going with this...thou shalt not judge, nor cast stones within glass houses. Count your lucky stars lady...
Finally. And Ditto.
Everyone who knew Stuart and spent time around him knew that he was still a very smart and interesting person to be around. What happened with him caused him to be impulsive with his thoughts or actions.....more like a kid at times. That is what got him in trouble.
There are hundreds of people who had lengthy conversations in which he had no problem being an active competent participate.
Yet, he would blurted out statements that might be off the wall and then you would know he did gave difficulty controlling himself. It was never because he wasn't competent just impulsive.
I hope the court room is full of all of us who know that he was totally aware of the divorce and his statements that were made in regards to the divorce. He knew what he was doing.
Karen opened a can of worms she may wish she had not. Not only are people pissed about the wreck, but now about her total lack if decency.
She argues Stuart Sr. could not "comprehend his actions" and he executed another will on May 14, 2010. She claimed Stuart still "loved" her and frequently wrote her and visited her in prison and he told the defendants he did not want to get divorced.
i agree , he couldnt comprehend his actions.
If the conservator can not change Stuart's will and Karen and Stuart were considered "married" past the 5 yrs threshold then it seems like a pretty strong
argument that Karen will get the
$4,000,000 and the house on Stuart Place
Sounds like the Irbys want to have it both ways. Incompetent when they want him to be and competent when they don't.
If you will remember Dr. Parrott of Belhaven said Stuart was asking him while he was still at UMC how enrollment was doing at Belhaven, and how the baseball team was doing. Then we learned he become unable to remember or testify and later his brother took over his affairs. Now we learn he was competent to divorce his wife and change his will?
Also, remember the interview with Stuart's good friend in the paper after his death? The friend said he thought Stuart still loved Karen. Let's also remember she has letters Stuart wrote to her while she was in prison. Wonder if they say how much he still cares about her? I suspect they could and probably do.
Also, as other have said a conservator can't decide a person should divorce someone or change a previous will.
Finally, poor Rebekah. You really need to step back from this. Your hate and jealousy of KI is ridicious.
Also, as other have said a conservator can't decide a person should divorce someone or change a previous will.
you mean , even if a spouse of an incompetent individual starts
becoming one of these???
1. Habitual cruelty and inhuman treatment;
2. adultery;
3. being sentenced to any penitentiary, and not being pardon before being sent there;
4. desertion for 1 year;
5. habitual drunkenness;
6. habitual and excessive use of Opium, Morphine or other like drug;
7. natural impotency;
8. insanity or idiocy at the time of marriage, if the other spouse did not know of such infirmity;
9. marriage to some other person at the time of the pretending marriage between the parties;
10. pregnancy of the wife by another person at the time of the marriage, if the husband did not know of such pregnancy;
11. parties being related to each other when the degrees of kin between whom marriage is prohibited by law;
12. incurable insanity.
Why on earth would Rebekah, or anyone for that matter, be jealous of Karen Irby? She's just the only one brave enough to sign her name on here. Most other people think the same way about Karen.
Jealous of what???? That makes me laugh...and then laugh again. And i do not hate her...i think she is a miserable excuse for a woman...but i dont hate her.
And as much as I know on that woman, if there is anyone actually jealous of her then they are as pathetic as she is.
I am not one to be jealous of anyone. I love my life...but thanks for your lame attempt to "get at me".
FWIW I hat KI too, and I don't have ovaries to think with.
If I read it correctly, a post a few days ago detailed their pre-nup, er - contract, er- arrangement - anyway, it said they had to last 5 years without filing for divorce. he filed in less than 5 years, but then withdrew it or let it lapse.
Any lawyers care to weigh in on how that affects their, um, "marital transaction"?
Becca. I assume it's the venom with which you spew your comments that make them so intolerable. Stating "what you know" on someone makes you sound petty as does calling someone pathetic. I don't think you're being completely honest with your adoring fans here when you paint yourself as the flawless opposite to Karen. I'm sure your personal "rap sheet" would make for a pretty decent bathroom read as well. Just sayin' honey.
When did I EVER say I was flawless or perfect...'honey'? You obviously know nothing about me, so quit pretending you do.
I make mistakes just like the next person.... The only thing Karen and I have in common is that we both happen to marry into well known and respected families.
Other than that, Karen and I are as different as night and day.
I am a hands on mom. Everything I do is for my child. He was never handed off to a nanny or anyone else to raise him. My son comes first before everything...and anyone who REALLY knows me (not certain facebook "friends") can tell you my son is my life.
I married the person I have loved since I was 19. I am 35 now- you do the math. I didn't marry for money. I didn't chase a millionare.
I don't mistreat or blame my husband for my mistakes. We have an honest, real marriage. We don't live for the spotlight and we don't have affairs- we just have an everyday, 'normal' marriage based on actual love.
I have never killed anyone.
I don't have the sense of entitlement either. I don't assume I am entitled to something just because my husband or my family has money. I appreciate what I have and the life I have- I don't take it for granted. I R E S P E C T my husband...
As far as my "rap sheet" is concerned...if you find something interesting on me then congrats to you. I, unlike some, own up to any mistake I have made in the past...and most of my mistakes, 'honey', were made in the early 20's or teens- NOT as an adult with children. And they were about as interesting as this post.
The stories I know about Karen are ones her actual "friends" have told me. People who have also known her for many years PRIOR to becoming an Irby as well. She isn't someone I would want to ever associate myself with. She is actually the type of person I stay clear of.
You see, 'honey', I know someone like Karen. I know someone VERY close to me like Karen...(close as in a family member, not close as in we have a relationship) and this person, without killing two people, is pretty much exactly like Karen- always looking for something more- never being satisfied in what she has today. Doing whatever she can do to get what she wants no matter who gets hurt. Putting money and everything else before her children. Short temper with a very mean streak- prone to tantrums. A "good" person on the outside because of what she does for the community but inside complete toxic. Vain, insecure, and extremely greedy. Unfortunately, like Karen's children (not going to use their names) I also call this person "Mom" too.
I don't judge Karen. I don't hate her...I just know she will never be happy and she will NOT stop taking...nothing will ever be enough for her.
I'm not jealous of her- nor would I ever in 4 million years (and a yacht) want anything that woman has.
Greed gets you no where...and in the end you find yourself a VERY lonely person. Money can ONLY buy so much...
3:06 pm, it's pretty easy to attack someone when you post anonymously. Why don't you post your name so we can investigate your "rap sheet" and see if you're flawless?
12:59pm, #2 would also be in play.
#2 might well be an issue but proving it always seems to be an issue. Imprisonment in the penitentiary is public record.
My point is that a conservator should have the ability to make decisions about divorce in these circumstances.
As Curt alluded..... Can you imagine the chicanery???....... if a spouse is allowed to live with no marital consequences .
I agree, Rebekah. You need to take a step back. Your posts sound like you are more involved with this situation than you need to be. Your posts suggest you have enough problems of your own that you certainly don't need to be wasting your time and energy judging and hating Karen I. Really....Go for a long walk and get away from your computer. It would do you good not obsessing about the Karen Irby's situation.
REBEKAH. You are seriously getting on my nerves. I'm through reading your me me me posts. You truly need to get your own life going and get out of business that is not yours.
Reb, your posts seem to annoy those who do not appreciate truth, honesty, honor and the value of fidelity. I adore learning of your complete devotion to your child and the yet unborn angel you carry. We need more mothers like yourself. Perhaps someone reading your posts will realize their own need for change for the better.
May true happiness follow you and yours all the days of your life!
I could care a less if i get on your nerves!!! Did anyone ask you to get on here and read? Surely there are others blogs out there of interest.
As a blogger on here, I state my opinion. If anyone has a problem with it, you are wasting your time bitching about it.
And all your complaining is highly irrelevent when you hide behind your computers and not post your name. I stand behind everything i say which is why i am not afraid to use my name.
And my very first post was my opinion. Then these anonymous people get on here and try and bash me so i am going to defend myself. Not one to let someone walk on me.
There have been a dozen or more posts about katen that were way worse than mine. I do not see anyone ripping away at them. Just me. So like i have said numerous times, take it up with me personally and email me. But, i know it is easier to write it here. You obviously dont want me knowing who you are but believe me, it would not bother nor surprise me. I do not spend my time worrying what others think of me. Especially a bunch of women!!!
1143...that is probably one of the nicest things ever! Thank you!
I think the few who keep bashing me already do not like me so this is their way of getting at me. It really does not bother me. Life is entirely too short to worry about what others think. I surround myself with real friends who love me, not ones who talk about me.
And yes, i was blessed with an amazing son so i must have done something right! He has been my inspiration to be the best parent I can be. Thank you again for your extremely kind words
Amen Rebekah! The control freaks out there who can't stand the forum Kingfish provides here should move along and get their freak on somewhere else.
Seriously, I wasn't going to respond, but taking a long walk is a good idea, Rebekah, and when you get back find something else to do. This Irby saga seems to be really getting to you in not such a healthy way. Go get your recipe book. Plan a meal. Cook a friend a dish. You need to think about something else.
After reading all of these comments it is obvious people are attacking only one person who uses her name and not everyone else. So that means it is personal.
If you are going to attack someone for speaking their mind and then get all upset when they defend tbeirself, you only end up looking foolish and bitter.
What started off as an opinion on this post turned into a personal attack.
If you dont like what someone has to say, fine. But dont attack her as well when she is clearly defending herself.
Reb didnt make it about her- the few who attacked her did.
It seems she has some extremely strong points and doesnt just spew hate like the rest of you. She seems to back up her views with pretty powerful statements.
I, for one, think the whole irby saga is disgusting and vile. I think it has reached an ultimate low. How Karen can look in the mirror is beyond me. I think she turned the death of innocent people into a halftime media event. It is gross and pitiful. I also think karen is a miserable person and does not care who she hurts to get what she wants.
i am not signing my name so i am curious if i will get the same backlash as rebekah did. If i dont, it is obviously personal against her.
And if you have personal issues eith someone, take it up with them. Stop being a coward.
God bless
Rebekah,
You are most welcome. Keep on calling "a douchebag a douchebag" whenever the occasion arises. Being raised with Southern manners did not afford me the meaning of the slang usage. However, I do possess a creative imagination that has painted a clear picture of its meaning.
Now, if you will excuse me while a well-deserved long soak in lavender will prepare me for attending the bridal shower for two fine people who are in love with each other. A tall, refreshing glass of cool water accompanies me as I contemplate my next KI post.
Kapt Roo - get your buttered popcorn ready for it may be one you will not wish to miss.
The truth hurts. Some cannot handle it so they go against the ones who speak it!
Kudos to using your name and standing behind your word. It takes alot of courage! The ones who bash you lack courage. That is their fault. Not yours.
There are very few who are on KI's side. She only has herself to blame.
And i would bet atleast one of the few bashers on here is actually Karen.
If they dont like you who cares. You dont seem like the type of person they could relate to anyway. You seem to have just a tad bit more depth to you
1:31. I think you are right and I have to agree with you.
I could spend allday defending myself and/or commenting on all of this and still get absolutely nowhere. What happens in this case has zilch impact on my life. I am not friends with her so whatever happens is clearly none of my business.
What turned into an opinion (which is what this blog is for- to post your opinions) went way beyond. I am wasting my time and life on a woman who means absolutely nothing to me!
I will be the first to admit my moronic actions..
and letting this "saga" is one of them.
A nice soak in a lavender tub sounds like a terrific and excellent way to begin my day!
Thank you to the ones who stood up for me. Sorry to the ones who don't like me.
To Becca and all of her supporters...It was my intent for her to respond to a few simple questions, in hopes of making her realize that what happened that night could've happened to anyone of us who's made the decision to drink and drive. I've done it.
NONE of US know really what happened inside that car...although I suspect strongly there could be truth to her being slapped and having her hair pulled by that spoiled brat of a man Stuart Irby. He was no saint. The "hardworking Irby's" you speak of DID NOT include him...his millions were handed to him on a silver platter.
Finally, NONE of YOU can say with any certainty what you would do if you were standing in her shoes. And if you say different, well, you're a liar. IF things went down over the years, and especially that particular night, then she has some entitlement. Maybe not to the tune of her trumpets, but SOME entitlement. Period.
Good day...
Don't you mean that spoiled brat Karen who was driving like a CRAZY WOMAN who ended up killing 2 people and seriously injuring 1 others.
Come on, stop bashing Stuart who could not until the day he died defend himself. SHE IS THE ONLY ONE WHO KNOWS WHAT HAPPENED IN THE CAR AND SHE ISN'T BRAVE ENOUGH NOR DOES SHE HAVE ENOUGH CLASS TO TELL THE TRUTH.
Jesus tells us that before we can receive forgiveness for our sins and enter into his mercy, we have to ask forgiveness of those who we have hurt. God have mercy on her soul for the lies she carries and the lack of character to ask forgiveness from this community, from HIS CHILDREN, FAMILY AND FRIENDS who all know he wasn't a violent person.
And shame on you for buying into her lies about him beating her. No one with any common sense believes that story. I know that she is violent because I have witnessed with my own eyes. You better ask for forgiveness for passing judgement on Stuart.
KF - why are the last 5 or 10 posts on this thread either personal attacks on one poster or said poster defending herself, instead of focusing on the appalingly greedy killer, KI?
Please don't let this thread get hijacked by people who have some vendetta against a regular poster at JJ.
5:02- I agree.
I haven't been coming here long, and I appreciate the good articles and updates. I have many questions I would like to ask about murders in the Jackson area in which there appears to have been no justice. But, for the most part I will just read and ask questions occasionally if allowed.
My question now would be, when we are reading about Karen Irby's run for the Irby money, why is someone by the name of Rebekah being attacked and insulted? She is entitled to her opinion, and I agree with everything she has said about Karen Irby. Are the people attacking Rebekah Karen Irby herself, and her mother?
I don't think Rebekah should feel she has to defend herself against such inappropriate insults and attacks. She has done nothing wrong, and she certainly hasn't caused the death of two wonderful physicians who would have lived a life of healing multitudes of persons, we don't know if Karen caused Stuart to take his life when he knew she was loose in the world, and Rebekah is not hounding after the estate belonging to another family.
So why the vile attacks on another poster? Isn't everyone entitled to state his or her thoughts?
4:27 PM - Read and re-read my post. It was an opinion. Mine. I haven't attacked anyone...just looking at it from another angle. Stuart was a Saint? Is that what I'm reading? Karen may be all of the things you say, maybe not though, right? I said "IF" things went down as has been suggested, then she has SOME entitlement.
You might need to ask for forgiveness, ma'am, as you seem to have judged, ever so harshly, yourself....you fall into that "throwing stones in glass houses" category too it seems. READ THE FREAKIN' POST AGAIN. I haven't cast the first stone...either I asked a question, or stated what everyone (without their head in their ass)already knows.
The only undisputable facts are that BOTH of them were alcoholic socialites with celebrity status...if none of this had happened, and a divorce occured, you can bet your sweet ass Karen would've been PAID. And my hunch is that she will be paid something in this case...I don;t necessarily agree she DESERVES it...
I'm a realist. You should be too.
AP, don't you think Karen has received money in the divorce settlement? She wants her divorce settlement money and the will proceeds. She's greedy.
Ok, my opinion is I would rather the Irby Estate pay for her medical bills throughout her life instead of SSI which would be us paying the tab!
Reverend Billy Graham stated an alarming fact once: Drunk driving kills more people than cancer.
With respect, to correct earlier posts, money is not the root of all evil. Nor is the love of money the root of all evil. In truth, it is:
"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil." ~ 1Timothy 6:10
No matter what was going on in that car that night between Karen and Stuart, SHE was the one driving, so the responsibility falls on her. Everyone needs to stop saying that he was beating her. If he was, why did she continue driving and at such a high rate of speed??? She left the JCC speeding and got caught miles down the road. People witnessed her erratic driving. All of you need help if you are going to believe her story after the fact.
You tell the truth from the beginning!!! That's called honesty. She failed to do that and there's no excuse in my book for her actions. Then trying to blame him after the fact and she was sentenced. REALLY??
I don't believe a word Karen says.
Rebekah...I'm on your page.
I spoke to 4:12s statement about Stuart BEATING HER... OH MY... being the cause of the wreck. So Yes, I take a stand against the easy patsy that Stuart was made to be because his evil X wife used him to soften her plight. He could not remember... Do all you forget he was in a coma for over a month.... She had months to place the blame yet didn't until it came down to her time in the court room. How more obvious does it need to be...do you need rose colored glasses or maybe 3D...
There is nothing in her background and no one who is now her friend would have befriended her before. She was not a socialite 5 years ago. So, let that BS die... she wasn't anyone before she trapped him into marrying her with the sad manipulation of the pregnancy. Ask anyone who knew the entire situation.... it was dire. Yet, he did what was right for the child and in turn lost his life.
I've had it. The catfight is over on this thread.
Post a Comment