Karen Irby Having Buyer's Regret With Guilty Plea
Kingfish reports on Karen Irby's two prong attack on her 18–year sentence for causing the deaths of Mark Pogue and Lisa Dedousis. Irby is asking the Mississippi Supreme Court to order Judge Tommie Green to recuse herself from the case and making a similar request to Judge Green. As grounds for the request, Irby argues that her lawyer had a conflict of interest because he was being paid by Stuart Irby.
Irby also faults her original lawyer for not asserting the defense of intervening superseding cause, which would have pointed the finger at Stuart Irby. The problem with this argument is that it is based on an affirmative defense in a civil case that is used when the defendant denies liability. The defense would not be applicable even in a civil case where the defendant admitted liability, which is essentially what Irby did by pleading guilty.
In a criminal case it would not be an affirmative defense. Instead, it would be the basis for a not-guilty plea. But Karen Irby pleaded guilty. And in order to plead guilty, Irby had to state on the record that she was satisfied with her legal representation.
The oddest thing about Irby's strategy is that she is not asking to be allowed to withdraw her guilty plea. She just wants a lighter sentence. The the grounds for the lighter sentence is that she didn't do it—Stuart Irby did. But you don't get a lighter sentence when someone else did it—you get acquitted.
It appears that Karen Irby expected a light sentence due to the support of the victims' families and her allegations against her husband. But Irby's sentence of a less than maximum 18 years is not surprising, as reflected in this post after the plea but before the sentencing. Irby could have gotten 20 years. In fact, she could get 20 years if she is successful in re-opening her sentencing.
Irby's attempt to get her sentence reduced is interesting. But it's unlikely to be successful.
