Jackson Jambalaya

can you spell "rolled over on the other defendants"

I can't wait to hear Mr. Mayfield's response to this plea. Oh, my bad, he can't can he? So let's just tie this off huh KF?

It's about time - I bet that Brewster and Sojourner comes into play now! Bet the tornado got Melanie's cell phone records too! The true story will now come out - maybe Mayfield was not as clean as many thought.

That's a Bill of Information which essentially is a waiver of the grand jury indictment process but not a plea of guilty. Did he actually plead guilty as well?

That's an odd application of the charge and a pretty broad definition of "injury".

Would that mean that it would be illegal to post pictures of a politician having an extra-marital affair? Or, someone behaving in an otherwise embarrassing way?

Is this a felony charge

No, not so clean. Mayfield is named in the information as a conspirator for a reason: he was guilty.

"to post a message online to harm someone"? Are you kidding me??
What "harm" was done to anyone here? Since when is it a crime to take somebody's picture if it's not lewd or for monetary profit? There was no crime here, and Mr. Guest knows it.

Mark Mayfield was charged with conspiracy to commit a felony. Where is this felony that cost Mark his career, his reputation and ultimately his life? I don't see it.

No matter who you supported for MS Senator (too bad none of the above wasn't an option, eh?), it's hard not to agree that it's deeply tragic anyone could become so blinded by zeal to do something this amoral to help a politician - a freaking politician! - & jeopardize their own reputation and family name for something that's just so ridiculously trivial in the grand scheme of things.

Whoever responded at 12:11 has to be the biggest ass that has ever posted on this site.

1:40, you're a moron.
The photo was taken in a private facility without the permission of the incapacitated subject. That, if not illegal (which it probably is), is immoral. Crawl back under your rock.

Mark Mayfield took the coward's way out. He put into motion the events that lead to his brains being blown out, not law enforcement or the DA.

"Whoever responded at 12:11 has to be the biggest ass that has ever posted on this site. "

Agreed

"Mark Mayfield ...... put into motion the events that lead to his brains being blown out, not law enforcement or the DA."

Not necessarily, which is why we have trials where evidence can be presented. I have heard (hearsay, not evidence) that all he did was answer one of the other suspects question as to which room number was Mrs. Cochran's, which he knew because his late mother had a nearby room. Hardly ringleader material, but it cost him his clients, job, reputation, etc.

Mark Mayfield, may he rest in peace, is the person responsible for ending his life. Its not John Mary, Chris McDaniel, Thad Cochran, or Mayor Mary.

He is deceased and will not be tried. The remaining defendants will answer to a grand jury.

At the end of the day, if Mr. Mayfield's involvement is shown to be as minimal as was stated at 2:57, it does not change who is responsible for him taking his own life. I just hope and pray that his family is able to put this behind them as much as possible.

The first to roll over usually gets the best deal. If one was certain that no crime was committed one would not have to start trying to cut a deal. The question is who and what was given for the pass.Some others may have reason to worry but time will pay. I am not in the pay of Capital Resources or a Tea Party Patriot.

I'm sorry, but I still don't see where these actions are a felony.

a picture of the facility, home of Senator Thad's wife contrasted with the lovely couple touring the world would have more impact, if any was to be had. Our values have changed in MS, nobody cares Thad is shacked up on taxpayer money, shacked up with a subordinate and pays for his special friends services on our payroll, to damn cheap to even take her on trips not funded by us. sweet deal for old Thad. may he live to be 100.

2:25, it does not matter in a criminal case what you think should be prohibited by law. It matters what is prohibited by law. This activity was not a felony, so it was wrong to charge Mark Mayfield with conspiracy to commit a felony. No felony crime happened here. Do you really live in a world where people should be arrested, hauled away in cuffs, thrown in jail and charged $250,000 bail for something that, in your opinion, "probably" is illegal?

"It may be distasteful, but it's not criminal." http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/politics/2014/08/06/john-mary-guilty-plea/13672761/

KF, he is not convicted of a felony. He has 5 years of non-adjudicated probation, not a felony conviction. You must have missed the part where the judge didn't accept the guilty plea and instead placed him in probation pursuant to Section 99-15-26.

Poster above must have posted before the KF put up the report as I read that Mayfield drew a detailed layout of the facility, including security systems, that enabled the shutterbug to get the photo on the third attempt, the first after Mayfield's contribution to this utterly stupid act.

Don't see that its a felony? read Section 97-45-17. The Legislature made the act a felony crime and some governor agreed and signed it into law. Don't like the law? Call your senator and representative.

I am as passionately anti-Chris McDaniel as one could possibly be, but I will always miss Mark Mayfield. He was a friend to many including me. I really miss him.

So let me get thus straight. A blogger or reporter calls me or messages me on Facebook. They're working on a story or a post. They ask if I know some information that will help them with their piece. I tell them INFORMATION THAT IS TRUE. They use the information to engage in PROTECTED SPEECH, to write a blog. It causes NO HARM that anybody can point to. How is this a crime, and how does the First Amendment not protect it? Truth is an absolute defense in a 1stAmd case, and the Rose Cochran story was TRUE... she was lying in a nursing home bed incapacitated. Kelly gets to publish this true fact without facing jail. If not, then the Kingfish can never publish any true story again of it hurst someone's feelings or damages a public figure (like a US senator). Better watch out, KF!

Only you and WAPT in the courtroom? Really?

All those defending the action are making themselves look pitiful.

It's illegal to take photographs of bedridden people in nursing homes without consent. It's a crime--there's no justification. Case closed.

It does not matter what YOU think, or what you think SHOULD happen, or anything like that. It's a crime, and justice needs to be served. So the canary just sang.

Mayfield's family was threatening to sue (actually promising to)after the funeral. I guess they heard the evidence against him and decided against it. What a sad mess.

I hate this for Rick Sager. I know him personally and have been close friends for about ten years; there's no way he did what John Mary says he did. I'm certainly no Friend of Chris McDaniel in the least, and I do believe Mary and Kelly deserve their felonies. This act was and is despicable to the nth degree to me.

But Sager would NEVER knowingly conspire to do something like this. I know people would say that about Mayfield, as well, and they may be true- I didn't know him. I do know Sager, though, and he just didn't do this. I know some people can fool you, but this is not something he'd do.

@4:22

No, that's not how it works.

The 1st amendment protects the publication of any legally obtained information. That's what the Pentagon papers case says. It doesn't give any additional protection to committing a crime to obtain that information.

So if out of the blue a reporter contacts you and you give him illegally obtained information, the reporter can safely publish it.

But, if the reporter conspires with you to obtain that information illegally, then the reporter goes to jail.

As difficult as it may be to hear, I think Mr. Mayfield made a personal decision based on facts he was aware of and we will likely never know. Having said that, I'm grateful that he made the decision to turn the gun inward again, difficult to hear. As a retired LEO, I anticipate others making decisions in the opposite direction. The time will come when the nudge/push is overwhelming for the common man and his response will be ugly, very ugly.

There are an instances in which the civil law protects one's privacy and allows tort damages for publication of information that is deemed private when obtained through improper intrusion into another's seclusion. Truth of the published information which is deemed private is no defense. So no, just because something is true does not automatically protect the publisher. And no, the First Amendment does not protect all speech, even if the speech is true.

Interesting. The woman that introduced Mary to Extra-Constitutional Clayton (Elaine Vechorik) is one of the named Plaintiffs in the True the Vote case. At some point the level of complicity and coordination between the McDaniel Campiagn and what is supposed to be a non-partisan 501c3 starts raising red flags. As much as I hate the IRS, it is starting to appear that the concerns over True the Vote's legitimacy as a qualified non-partisan, non-profit were justified - Lois Lerner notwithstanding.

Mayfield's apparent knuckleheaded thinking somehow got him associated with three nitwits and it cost him his life. He most likely knew Mary was singing and the facts would definitely implicate him. No other reason to end it all. Can't wait to see if Mayfield called Mel at 1 AM right after Kelly's arrest.

"Posting With Intent To Harm"??? What in the world have we be subjected to for months every time anyone wished to have a rational conversation regarding the recent Senatorial vote. Good Grief! Yes, I am certain some of the biggest assholes have posted multiple times on this site, including, but not limited to, some of the above posts.

97-45-17. As in the guilty plea document. Felony, as in "feloniously" in the documents. Felony being a crime punishable by more than 1 year in confinement. As in 5 years. Try checking out "vulnerable persons," privacy, access, consent, and other terms, too. Save you a lot of trouble next time y'all are feeling so pure, so true, so destined by God to set everyone but yourself right. Course, nursing home isn't in the Constitution either, harrumph, brave brave Patriots.

Hey! Come in my mom's bedroom uninvited and start snapping pictures. It won't end up well for you no matter what you claim that "it's ok".

4:22 You expose your ignorance. "Truth is an absolute defense in 1st Amendment cases"" The twain do not meet. Also, since your know obvously know the First Amendment addresses speech, I suggest you read the rest of it. Speech is not all it covers.

I've got to disagree with you on this one Kingfish. Sweat pants should not be worn to a fishing pier. Sweat pants should not be worn out of the house. They are like pajamas.

Come in my mom's bedroom uninvited and start snapping pictures. It won't end up well for you no matter what you claim that "it's ok".

No doubt it would be a repulsive scene in and of itself.

"What section of the Mississippi Code makes taking a picture in a nursing home a felony (or for that matter, a misdemeanor)?"

Hey rube - you may think it's ok to peek into folks' bedrooms and take pictures of them but most of us are not as vulnerable as Mrs. Cochran, and many of us are well-armed: there won't be enough of you left to charge with anything if you start taking pictures through our bedroom window.

Really, what is it that you people don't get going into a female's bedroom, uninvited and photographing her and publishing her photo without her permission is against the law?

Ok to do that to your mother, wife or daughter?

So I can come over tomorrow and go into your residence and film the females in your home and make money off of publishing them in their pajamas or nightgown?

St Catherine's is a RESIDENTIAL facility ie the people pay to live there!

Are y'all sick in the head and want to believe you can go take photos of people dying in hospice too ?

You people are creepy.

At least the political guys thought the end justified the means and would do anything, even break the law to win.

But, you guys defending the action are just bizarre!

Does the moral scold at 3:43 know anything about Mr. McDaniels personal life? I'm not suggesting that it's any of our business, but he/she is. Mr. Cohcrans wife has been incapacitated and not in this world for some time. Last time I checked Mrs. McDaniel was quite healthy.

Neither of these peoples personal lives are our business. But, if you bring it up as an issue against one, be prepared for the same standard to be applied across the board.

Actually Tammy came in halfway during the hearing. Was only 15 minutes or so.

Yeah 8:40, try it big boy. You don't have enough bullets in your pea shooter. Repulsive doesn't begin to describe you, McDaniel or the scene if you tried something like that. You folks are your own worst enemies.

Neither freedom of the press nor free speech gives anyone a " get out of jail free" card if they criminally do harm to fellow citizen.

You all know you can't deliberately libel or slander anyone and you can't yell "Fire" in a crowded theater. These were the first exceptions.

With the invention of photography and now the Internet, more legal exceptions became necessary.

There is a danger in literal interpretations based on one sentence or paragraph. The meanings can be altered by the larger context.

You all should have learned this in school but since you didn't, I'm trying to help you here.

If you spout such nonsense in social settings, people will not bother to correct you out of politeness, but they also will conclude you aren't bright and just not bother with you period.

Only the two of you there but yet Jim Prince was all over Facebook, repeatedly gloating about what he persists in calling a nursing home "break-in."

I'll put it to you this way. Suppose there is a compromising photo of a candidate and a campaign manager or a politician and his aide. Its locked up in someone's office or home. The only way I can get it without permission is to physically break in and steal the photo.

Will I get in trouble for publishing it? Maybe not. Will I get in trouble for breaking into the home or office and stealing it? Probably so.

Entering Mrs. Cochran's room without permission sounds pretty close to a break-in. Kelly's orange jumpsuit seems to confirm that.

Very astute KF, I am told it exist too.

@5:41: What in the name of all that is unholy do you mean by THIS?

"Having said that, I'm grateful that he made the decision to turn the gun inward again, difficult to hear. As a retired LEO, I anticipate others making decisions in the opposite direction."

You are 'grateful' that he killed himself? I hope I am misreading your remarks.

@5:41: What in the name of all that is unholy do you mean by THIS?

"Having said that, I'm grateful that he made the decision to turn the gun inward again, difficult to hear. As a retired LEO, I anticipate others making decisions in the opposite direction."

You are 'grateful' that he killed himself? I hope I am misreading your remarks.

"What in the name of all that is unholy do you mean by THIS?"

As opposed to taking out his family, or a bunch of kids at a day care, or shooting a cop to provoke "suicide by cop", as has happened elsewhere.

It's not rocket science 5:41.

I never met Mark Mayfield. Maybe he did "something wrong", but maybe he did not. We may never know. Many of you claim that he committed suicide because he was guilty. I certainly would not want you as a judge or as a juror, because you make conclusions without hearing all of the facts. Some people accused of a crime commit suicide because the allegations are true. Some people accused of a crime commit suicide because their reputation has been ruined even if the allegations later are determined to be false.

Does John Mary have motivation to lie? Yes, it's called freedom. Is John Mary telling the truth? Only John Mary knows. John Mary will suffer no REAL punishment as a result of his plea. Does that make his testimony suspect? Yes.

I am confident that some immature bozo will read this comment and make some irrational, immature response. Well, thankfully for him/her, stupidity isn't a crime.

You must think the Madison PD arrested Mayfield without checking his phone records. I'd also be willing to bet he's the one that called Melanie at 1 AM informing her of Kelly's arrest.

Go straight to hell whoever commented @5:41pm. Don't for a second think anyone who knew Mark could be grateful for that

Mayfield's family threatened to sue the Madison Police for "trespassing" the day of Mayfield's death. I guess they forgot the $250K bond allowed them access to his property.

10:03 am You are assuming that the legal system is always corrupt and doesn't require evidence to substantiate the claims of the pleading defendant.

Television crime and legal shows are fiction.

Yes, the system is imperfect as we all know, but you need to read the court documents and hear the cases before you jump to conclusions.


It's very clear that the general public's understanding of suicide is very poor and again based too much on television shows and sound bytes.

People don't commit suicide because their " reputations are destroyed". It is that they find themselves in a situation they deem ( usually mistakenly) so hopeless that they can see no future that isn't painful. They have become, as a result, clinically severely depressed.

The behaviors of the individual leading up to their suicide and how they choose to commit suicide are relevant to psychiatrists and psychologists in determining " why?". But, this notion that other people " make" someone commit suicide is the stuff of media more than of reality.

In the end, it's about the person's ability to deal with extreme stresses and disappointments and traumas in life and their belief in themselves to survive the challenges in their lives. It can also be about their body chemistry as bi-polars for example, are at high risk to commit suicide.

All of you are doing Mr. Mayfield's friends and family a huge disservice in your misunderstanding of the tragedy of suicide. Your mythical notions simply delay or prevent their ability to heal from the trauma this is for them!

I know your intentions are well meaning and you think you are supporting the family, but you are making it worse.

8:04 this is 10:03 in response.

You said, "You are assuming that the legal system is always corrupt and doesn't require evidence to substantiate the claims of the pleading defendant. Television crime and legal shows are fiction . . . you need to read the court documents and hear the cases before you jump to conclusions."

I make no such assumptions and I did not jump to any conclusions -- I am a member of the legal profession and I am in criminal court every day.

The legal system is not corrupt. Television crime and legal shows are fiction. I haven't jumped to any conclusions. Remember, I said "I certainly would not want you as a judge or as a juror, because you make conclusions without hearing all of the facts." We have not heard all of the facts yet. All that has been heard is a plea statement by someone who may be telling the truth OR who may be lying. Remember, John Mary's case is nonadjudicated. He will suffer no REAL punishment because he offered to plead guilty and he implicated others.

If someone pleads guilty and implicates another person, should we now conclude that the other person is guilty? NO. If there is a guilty plea, the judge determines if there is a factual basis, but that does not mean others are guilty because the other person has not had their day in court.

For a judge to determine if there is "a factual basis," the judge listens to the prosecutor's and pleading defendant's version of the facts and decides whether or not a crime has been committed IF the prosecutor's and defendant's version of the facts are true. The judge does NOT conclude that the prosecutor's or defendant's version of the facts are true.

It is easy for a criminal co-defendant to claim that a now-dead person committed a criminal act. You were correct when you said "you need to . . . hear the cases before you jump to conclusions." That has not yet happened. Maybe Mark Mayfield committed a crime and maybe he did not. A plea by a co-defendant is hardly "hearing all of the facts."

Finally, if we accept, as accurate, your "psychiatric" analysis of the reasons why people commit suicide, a suicide is NO proof of guilt.

True enough. One way or the other, it will all come out.

"The legal system is not corrupt. "

For someone who claims to be in a courtroom every day you seem curiously unfamiliar with the Innocence Project, which has freed many innocent people jailed due to incompetence and yes, sometimes, corruption on the part of prosecutors.