Owner of Campbell's Cottage arrested

It's strange to hear you refer to yourself as a reporter, Robin. I hold much higher regard for you.

[Robin Garr]

It's strange to hear you refer to yourself as a reporter, Robin. I hold much higher regard for you.

Hey, I'm a lifelong reporter, but at least I had the good judgment to begin recovery reasonably soon after Gannett came.

A lot has been tossed about. Nothing is for sure. I know Susan and cannot say anything other than I like her a lot and she has helped me along my culinary journey. I've been through the legal system myself and know that even though we as a society state that individuals are supposedly innocent until proven guilty, in reality the opposite is what seems to be true. Whatever comes of this, in the meantime, keep an open mind.

Thanks Deb, for pointing out that people are innocent until proven guilty. There are so many people who really love the classes and the community there, and I hope that those great things continue, regardless....

Thanks Deb, for pointing out that people are innocent until proven guilty. There are so many people who really love the classes and the community there, and I hope that those great things continue, regardless....

Like I didn't do that from the start?

I fully agree. I've attended class there and know Susan. I've been through the legal system myself and know that even though we as a society state that individuals are supposedly innocent until proven guilty, in reality the opposite is what seems to be true.

Thanks Deb, for pointing out that people are innocent until proven guilty. There are so many people who really love the classes and the community there, and I hope that those great things continue, regardless....

Like I didn't do that from the start?

Doogy...you very well may have....I apparently just read Deb's first.... not casting aspersions...

I fully agree. I've attended class there and know Susan. I've been through the legal system myself and know that even though we as a society state that individuals are supposedly innocent until proven guilty, in reality the opposite is what seems to be true.

I have known Susan for a long time and her boyfriend Chuck, all I can say is that she is a good, decent person and that is really easy to judge when we don't know all the truth (not saying that I do). Justice sometimes has a way of been on the side of the party with more money in this case the insurance company. I just don't see Susan doing something like that. Just my 2 cents.

There is an article in the CJ today. Commonwealth's Attorney is saying there's videotape, although they won't say exactly what's on the videotape.

There is an article in the CJ today. Commonwealth's Attorney is saying there's videotape, although they won't say exactly what's on the videotape.

You're just going to have to wait for the trial, the place where all the evidence comes out.

Thanks to all of you offering your support for Susan through this ordeal!

Know that things at the store and the classes will continue to move forward with great customer service and a wonderful classroom experience!

We are grateful for all of the love and support our customers, chefs, instructors and friends have shown us since the fire and we are looking forward to finally being able to resolve matters once and for all in court.

Please note that Susan has not been arrested....just indicted(sp). She has to appear for an arraignment on Monday, according to what I've seen/read.

I always thought that first indicted, then arrested, then arraignment. 3 different steps to the process. It seems the first 2 are complete. You get arrested and booked/processed and then released on bond. Then you show up in court for the arraignment.

Of course, not that I've every experienced it or anything. Must have seen it on tv.

Not necessarily. It all really depends. For "capital or infamous crimes" (basically felonies) under federal jurisdiction, the grand jury must issue a true bill in order to charge someone. However, you can arrest someone in advance of that. For example, if I'm arrested transporting prostitutes across state lines (federal jurisdiction), I would be arrested on the spot. I would likely then be indicted by the grand jury, and then arraigned.

In a case like this, under federal jurisdiction (according to the story), your steps above are probably right. It sounds like it was a long-term investigation that lead to the indictment. It's also very possible there will be no "arrest" per se, but that after the arraignment bail will be set. If she cannot pay the bail, she'll likely be detained.

It's also important to note that most states have no grand jury requirement, though I believe Kentucky does, similar to the federal system.

I don't practice criminal law, of course. This is all off the top of my head from my crim-pro classes way back when.

Lukjan has NOT been arrested according to the CJ. It may also be noted that the "US attorney's office .. declined to prosecute"

I have heard a rumor that in the USA that a person is presumed innocent until proved guilty.

I feel for Mary Wheatley who teaches so many classes at Campbell's and also for Lida and the rest of Susan's staff. CD

Most of her cooking classes are at her home or Seafood Connection. I don't believe I have ever seen her in one of Campbell's brochures.

I always thought that first indicted, then arrested, then arraignment. 3 different steps to the process. It seems the first 2 are complete. You get arrested and booked/processed and then released on bond. Then you show up in court for the arraignment.

Of course, not that I've every experienced it or anything. Must have seen it on tv.

Not necessarily. It all really depends. For "capital or infamous crimes" (basically felonies) under federal jurisdiction, the grand jury must issue a true bill in order to charge someone. However, you can arrest someone in advance of that. For example, if I'm arrested transporting prostitutes across state lines (federal jurisdiction), I would be arrested on the spot. I would likely then be indicted by the grand jury, and then arraigned.

In a case like this, under federal jurisdiction (according to the story), your steps above are probably right. It sounds like it was a long-term investigation that lead to the indictment. It's also very possible there will be no "arrest" per se, but that after the arraignment bail will be set. If she cannot pay the bail, she'll likely be detained.

It's also important to note that most states have no grand jury requirement, though I believe Kentucky does, similar to the federal system.

I don't practice criminal law, of course. This is all off the top of my head from my crim-pro classes way back when.

Remember from our CrimPro [and ConLaw] classes that the SCOTUS has not interpreted the 5th Amendment grand jury requirement as being applicable to the states, although most do [including KY]....from what I've read, this fire occurred in 2006, so you're right when you said this was a long-term investigation that culminated in an indictment and [upcoming] arraignment....the police claim to [supposedly] have a videotape which is implied to contain some potentially incriminating evidence....stay tuned.