ILNews

Indianapolis IP attorney killed by husband after filing for divorce

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Practicing law was never an obligation for Indianapolis attorney Mary Jane Frisby but a chance for her to say, “Wow, look what we get to do.”

That mentality is what friends and colleagues say kept her going as an intellectual property lawyer, practicing at Barnes & Thornburgh since law school graduation a decade ago. And, she was preparing for a new chapter in her life and legal career.
 

Frisby-MaryJane-mug Frisby

“MJ embraced life and lived to the fullest in every sense of the phrase,” said Deb Agard, an Indianapolis family law attorney and a longtime friend since law school. “The thing that MJ brought to our legal community is practicing law for the sake of itself, being so happy to help someone understand what their intellectual property was and working to protect that.”

But now, the legal community is reeling from the news of Frisby’s death. Police found the 44-year-old dead in her Brownsburg home Aug. 26, hours after her 58-year-old husband, David, climbed atop a downtown Indianapolis parking garage across from Barnes & Thornburg, fired shots at the law firm where his wife had worked, and then turned the gun on himself and fell several stories to the street below.

Hundreds of spectators watched from the street and nearby offices. Some employees in the state court offices located on South Meridian Street heard and witnessed what happened, and businesses in the immediate area – including Barnes & Thornburg – were temporarily locked down until police could fully determine what was happening. There were reports that bullets lodged in the law firm’s walls, and attorneys inside were instructed to move away from external walls as police tried to get the situation under control outside. Police found a note and recording in David Frisby’s car alerting them that his wife’s body would be found inside their home. It appeared she’d been strangled, possibly early that morning, police said.

The two had been married for 22 years, though Mary Jane Frisby had filed for divorce in Hendricks County Aug. 18. Agard was representing her friend in the divorce, and she said she’d last spoken to Mary Jane the day before she was killed.

On his Facebook page in the hours before his suicide, David Frisby posted a message condemning the Indianapolis law firm where his wife had worked.

Despite those events, though, what stands out for those who knew and practiced with Frisby is how she lived her life and practiced law with one of the city’s largest law firms.

“She was such a kind soul, I don’t know how else to say it,” Agard said. “A lover of music and art, one of the most well-read people I’d ever met. This is a time to celebrate MJ for being authentically herself.”

A first-generation American of British parents, Frisby graduated summa cum laude from Indiana University School of Law – Indianapolis in 2000. She’d done her undergraduate work at the same school and received a B.A. with highest distinction, majoring in philosophy with a minor in French.

Agard said she and Frisby were “connected at the hip” in law school and kept in touch regularly in the decade since graduating. They had a standing “date” once a month, something that had not happened only twice in 10 years and neither missed unless one was traveling.

“MJ was one of those people who was so screaming brilliant but was one of the most humble individuals you’d ever meet,” Agard said. “She was third in our class, but that didn’t mean anything to her. What was important was doing her best.”

Frisby began her law practice at Barnes & Thornburg in 2000. She’d worked her way up the ranks at the firm and became a partner in January 2008. Her practice included all areas of IP – trademark, copyright, patent, unfair competition, advertising, privacy, publicity, and general commercial law. She also assisted clients with non-litigation IP enforcement, including domain name arbitration proceedings, take-down notifications, Internet-based keyword advertising enforcement worldwide, and in proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

Agard recalled visiting Frisby at her law firm office and seeing three shelves in her office full of rubber ducks that were part of a trademark or copyright matter she was handling for a client.

“She was so thrilled to be able to study rubber ducks, and so glad that her clients were named Inc. and Co. rather than Mr. And Mrs.,” said Agard. “Trial was the last place she ever wanted to be, and her practice was never to quote when, but to reach the right result. That was something I always respected and tried to emulate in my career.”

That love for IP law expressed itself not only in her practice, but also in her teaching those kinds of courses at her alma mater. Agard said her friend loved being a part of the law school experience that they had enjoyed so much.

“We were weird and loved law school,” Agard said. “The opportunity to be in that atmosphere, seeing the look of wonder in her students’ eyes and being a part of mental gymnastics as she liked to call it, is what she loved.”

Aside from the IP courses, Frisby also taught continuing legal education courses to her colleagues.

“She was a consummate professional, who knew the issues so well to advocate for her clients but never stopped treating opposing counsel with respect,” said IP attorney Jim Dimos with Frost Brown Todd, who’d worked with Frisby on copyright cases during the past decade. “What was so refreshing about Mary Jane was that she was very knowledgeable and was willing to share that knowledge through CLE or informally between colleagues. You could always call her up and bounce ideas or issues off of her.”

Generally, friends and colleagues in the legal community were stunned to hear the news of her death.

U.S. District Court Senior Judge Larry McKinney couldn’t believe the news about the woman who’d interned for him a semester in 1998, while she was still in law school.

“She was just excellent, so bright,” he said. “Really, Mary Jane was a scholar and excellent researcher who was really intrigued by the law and you could just tell loved it so much. This is just incomprehensible.”

Though she loved being at Barnes & Thornburg, Frisby had decided to take an IP-focused general counsel post at Cummins in order to spend more time with family and take her career to the next level, Agard said. That position has been in the works for about a year, and she’d turned down one offer in the past, her friend said.

But the law firm’s long hours took their toll through the years. Something changed, and David had almost become a different person, Agard said. The two had gone through counseling and struggled to conquer his alcoholism. Death and suicide threats had surfaced more than a year ago, but no one – including Mary Jane – ever thought it would be carried out.

The two were truly happy for many years, and Agard described David as a good person and a brilliant man who was historically very kind and loving. They’d decided at the start of Mary Jane’s legal career that she would focus on the career while David would stay home to care for their two children – a son who’s now 21 and in college and a daughter who is 19 with Down syndrome. The concern was always for the kids, Agard said.

“Even as brilliant as these two were, they weren’t immune to what happened here,” Agard said. “I think MJ truly believed that given their intelligence and mutual respect for one another, that because of their truly good marriage for a number of years and because of their children, that this couldn’t happen. Whatever problems they had, they tried to work through them. But David couldn’t accept that the marriage was over. They weren’t immune.”

Reflecting on what happened, Dimos at Frost Brown Todd said he’s proud to have been able to know and work with Mary Jane and that what happened contains a lesson: “This reminds all of us how life is truly so fragile.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. A high ranking Indiana supreme Court operative caught red handed leading a group using the uber offensive N word! She must denounce or be denounced! (Or not since she is an insider ... rules do not apply to them). Evidence here: http://m.indianacompanies.us/friends-educational-fund-for-negroes.364110.company.v2#top_info

  2. A high ranking bureaucrat with Ind sup court is heading up an organization celebrating the formal N word!!! She must resign and denounce! http://m.indianacompanies.us/friends-educational-fund-for-negroes.364110.company.v2#top_info

  3. ND2019, don't try to confuse the Left with facts. Their ideologies trump facts, trump due process, trump court rules, even trump federal statutes. I hold the proof if interested. Facts matter only to those who are not on an agenda-first mission.

  4. OK so I'll make this as short as I can. I got a call that my daughter was smoking in the bathroom only her and one other girl was questioned mind you four others left before them anyways they proceeded to interrogate my daughter about smoking and all this time I nor my parents got a phone call,they proceeded to go through her belongings and also pretty much striped searched my daughter including from what my mother said they looked at her Brest without my consent. I am furious also a couple months ago my son hurt his foot and I was never called and it got worse during the day but the way some of the teachers have been treating my kids they are not comfortable going to them because they feel like they are mean or don't care. This is unacceptable in my mind i should be able to send my kids to school without worry but now I worry how the adults there are treating them. I have a lot more but I wanted to know do I have any attempt at a lawsuit because like I said there is more that's just some of what my kids are going through. Please respond. Sincerely concerned single parent

  5. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) End of Year Report 2014. (page 13) Under the current system many local registering agencies are challenged just keeping up with registration paperwork. It takes an hour or more to process each registrant, the majority of whom are low risk offenders. As a result law enforcement cannot monitor higher risk offenders more intensively in the community due to the sheer numbers on the registry. Some of the consequences of lengthy and unnecessary registration requirements actually destabilize the life’s of registrants and those -such as families- whose lives are often substantially impacted. Such consequences are thought to raise levels of known risk factors while providing no discernible benefit in terms of community safety. The full report is available online at. http://www.casomb.org/index.cfm?pid=231 National Institute of Justice (NIJ) US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs United States of America. The overall conclusion is that Megan’s law has had no demonstrated effect on sexual offenses in New Jersey, calling into question the justification for start-up and operational costs. Megan’s Law has had no effect on time to first rearrest for known sex offenders and has not reduced sexual reoffending. Neither has it had an impact on the type of sexual reoffense or first-time sexual offense. The study also found that the law had not reduced the number of victims of sexual offenses. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/app/publications/abstract.aspx? ID=247350 The University of Chicago Press for The Booth School of Business of the University of Chicago and The University of Chicago Law School Article DOI: 10.1086/658483 Conclusion. The data in these three data sets do not strongly support the effectiveness of sex offender registries. The national panel data do not show a significant decrease in the rate of rape or the arrest rate for sexual abuse after implementation of a registry via the Internet. The BJS data that tracked individual sex offenders after their release in 1994 did not show that registration had a significantly negative effect on recidivism. And the D.C. crime data do not show that knowing the location of sex offenders by census block can help protect the locations of sexual abuse. This pattern of noneffectiveness across the data sets does not support the conclusion that sex offender registries are successful in meeting their objectives of increasing public safety and lowering recidivism rates. The full report is available online at. http://www.jstor.org/stable/full/10.1086/658483 These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of conclusions and reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. People, including the media and other organizations should not rely on and reiterate the statements and opinions of the legislators or other people as to the need for these laws because of the high recidivism rates and the high risk offenders pose to the public which simply is not true and is pure hyperbole and fiction. They should rely on facts and data collected and submitted in reports from the leading authorities and credible experts in the fields such as the following. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 0.8% (page 30) The full report is available online at http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/2014_Outcome_Evaluation_Report_7-6-2015.pdf California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) (page 38) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 1.8% The full report is available online at. http://www.google.com/url?sa= t&source=web&cd=1&ved= 0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.cdcr.ca.gov%2FAdult_ Research_Branch%2FResearch_ documents%2FOutcome_ evaluation_Report_2013.pdf&ei= C9dSVePNF8HfoATX-IBo&usg=AFQjCNE9I6ueHz-o2mZUnuxLPTyiRdjDsQ Bureau of Justice Statistics 5 PERCENT OF SEX OFFENDERS REARRESTED FOR ANOTHER SEX CRIME WITHIN 3 YEARS OF PRISON RELEASE WASHINGTON, D.C. Within 3 years following their 1994 state prison release, 5.3 percent of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today. The full report is available online at. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rsorp94pr.cfm Document title; A Model of Static and Dynamic Sex Offender Risk Assessment Author: Robert J. McGrath, Michael P. Lasher, Georgia F. Cumming Document No.: 236217 Date Received: October 2011 Award Number: 2008-DD-BX-0013 Findings: Study of 759 adult male offenders under community supervision Re-arrest rate: 4.6% after 3-year follow-up The sexual re-offense rates for the 746 released in 2005 are much lower than what many in the public have been led to expect or believe. These low re-offense rates appear to contradict a conventional wisdom that sex offenders have very high sexual re-offense rates. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236217.pdf Document Title: SEX OFFENDER SENTENCING IN WASHINGTON STATE: RECIDIVISM RATES BY: Washington State Institute For Public Policy. A study of 4,091 sex offenders either released from prison or community supervision form 1994 to 1998 and examined for 5 years Findings: Sex Crime Recidivism Rate: 2.7% Link to Report: http://www.oncefallen.com/files/Washington_SO_Recid_2005.pdf Document Title: Indiana’s Recidivism Rates Decline for Third Consecutive Year BY: Indiana Department of Correction 2009. The recidivism rate for sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05%, one of the lowest in the nation. In a time when sex offenders continue to face additional post-release requirements that often result in their return to prison for violating technical rules such as registration and residency restrictions, the instances of sex offenders returning to prison due to the commitment of a new sex crime is extremely low. Findings: sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05% Link to Report: http://www.in.gov/idoc/files/RecidivismRelease.pdf Once again, These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. No one can doubt that child sexual abuse is traumatic and devastating. The question is not whether the state has an interest in preventing such harm, but whether current laws are effective in doing so. Megan’s law is a failure and is destroying families and their children’s lives and is costing tax payers millions upon millions of dollars. The following is just one example of the estimated cost just to implement SORNA which many states refused to do. From Justice Policy Institute. Estimated cost to implement SORNA Here are some of the estimates made in 2009 expressed in 2014 current dollars: California, $66M; Florida, $34M; Illinois, $24M; New York, $35M; Pennsylvania, $22M; Texas, $44M. In 2014 dollars, Virginia’s estimate for implementation was $14M, and the annual operating cost after that would be $10M. For the US, the total is $547M. That’s over half a billion dollars – every year – for something that doesn’t work. http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/08-08_FAC_SORNACosts_JJ.pdf. Attempting to use under-reporting to justify the existence of the registry is another myth, or a lie. This is another form of misinformation perpetrated by those who either have a fiduciary interest in continuing the unconstitutional treatment of a disfavored group or are seeking to justify their need for punishment for people who have already paid for their crime by loss of their freedom through incarceration and are now attempting to reenter society as honest citizens. When this information is placed into the public’s attention by naive media then you have to wonder if the media also falls into one of these two groups that are not truly interested in reporting the truth. Both of these groups of people that have that type of mentality can be classified as vigilantes, bullies, or sociopaths, and are responsible for the destruction of our constitutional values and the erosion of personal freedoms in this country. I think the media or other organizations need to do a in depth investigation into the false assumptions and false data that has been used to further these laws and to research all the collateral damages being caused by these laws and the unconstitutional injustices that are occurring across the country. They should include these injustices in their report so the public can be better informed on what is truly happening in this country on this subject. Thank you for your time.

ADVERTISEMENT