4937 Hopespring Dr Goes into Foreclosure

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I know that I'm in the minority here but I'll say it anyway. From the beginning of this lawsuit, I have thought it frivolous. The fact that KC did not identify a picture of this ZG coupled with the reality that this woman is not Fernandez-Gonzalez, that the name is apparently much more common than I had ever imagined, indicate to me that this woman, egged on by what I consider an unethical lawyer, sought to gain monetarily by a coincidence.

The deposition of the Anthonys was nothing short of a publicity stunt in which the lawyers sought to disgrace the entire family, for professing belief in their daughter's tall tale and for not wanting to expose family matters that involved only them and her. Can anyone, in their sorry positions at that time, say that they would have done otherwise? Most of us who are parents and gps, would have grasped at any straw in order to hang on to a shred of hope, first that the baby was still alive, and second, that our own flesh and blood had not harmed her.

As many of you have previously done, I now have an almost contemptuous view of the Anthonys' actions, particularly in their public appearances. However, that doesn't mean that they deserved to be punished by a money hungry, attention seeking person who was not a wage earner to begin with, when this whole sad story began to unravel.

I think it is very possible that the Anthonys were advised to lose their home, because the odds are great, given the antipathy aginst them, they would lose it to this person in a trial. And lose it only because of the poor public opinion of them and the public's apetite for revenge against a baby killer. The glaring problem is that they did not kill little Caylee, they loved her. They're being punished because they apparently still love their daughter, despite her heinous actions.

In any case, they have lost everything they once held dear except their son. They will never have normal lives again and will always be recipients of public scorn. While I don't see them as any kind of great examples of parental demeanor in tragedy, I think their basic personalities (mainly CA's) directed their behaviour reflexibly. From what we know of them, they (mainly CA) were hardworking parents with a tendency to overlook or minimize their daughter's troubling traits, with total ignorance of her true disorder. While I feel saddest for little Caylee, I can only imagine the depths of despair CA must feel in her soul in the stillness of night, as she remembers and reflects. I wouldn't trade places with her for all the tea in China. Her life will be a daily misery to live, even on a cruise ship in the sun.


Paula
You are not alone....many feel this was a frivolous lawsuit.

However, I have to agree with ZZ on this one. Even if it was 24 hours (which it wasn't, it was much longer and she still probably has people that believe she was involved), can you imagine what it would feel like to be a person named as or mistaken for the person who kidnapped a 2 year old that remained missing? To have been at the same apts w/i a short period of time from when/where KC says she dropped Caylee off? Your life would be hell, your children would be harassed, probably worse. No, IMO....KC and CA should pay for this one.

moo
 
Who knows, if ZG had not filed a lawsuit she may have been under the bus by now instead of RK? JMO
 
I know that I'm in the minority here but I'll say it anyway. From the beginning of this lawsuit, I have thought it frivolous. The fact that KC did not identify a picture of this ZG coupled with the reality that this woman is not Fernandez-Gonzalez, that the name is apparently much more common than I had ever imagined, indicate to me that this woman, egged on by what I consider an unethical lawyer, sought to gain monetarily by a coincidence.

The deposition of the Anthonys was nothing short of a publicity stunt in which the lawyers sought to disgrace the entire family, for professing belief in their daughter's tall tale and for not wanting to expose family matters that involved only them and her. Can anyone, in their sorry positions at that time, say that they would have done otherwise? Most of us who are parents and gps, would have grasped at any straw in order to hang on to a shred of hope, first that the baby was still alive, and second, that our own flesh and blood had not harmed her.

As many of you have previously done, I now have an almost contemptuous view of the Anthonys' actions, particularly in their public appearances. However, that doesn't mean that they deserved to be punished by a money hungry, attention seeking person who was not a wage earner to begin with, when this whole sad story began to unravel.

I think it is very possible that the Anthonys were advised to lose their home, because the odds are great, given the antipathy aginst them, they would lose it to this person in a trial. And lose it only because of the poor public opinion of them and the public's apetite for revenge against a baby killer. The glaring problem is that they did not kill little Caylee, they loved her. They're being punished because they apparently still love their daughter, despite her heinous actions.

In any case, they have lost everything they once held dear except their son. They will never have normal lives again and will always be recipients of public scorn. While I don't see them as any kind of great examples of parental demeanor in tragedy, I think their basic personalities (mainly CA's) directed their behaviour reflexibly. From what we know of them, they (mainly CA) were hardworking parents with a tendency to overlook or minimize their daughter's troubling traits, with total ignorance of her true disorder. While I feel saddest for little Caylee, I can only imagine the depths of despair CA must feel in her soul in the stillness of night, as she remembers and reflects. I wouldn't trade places with her for all the tea in China. Her life will be a daily misery to live, even on a cruise ship in the sun.

bbm: I can respect your opinion, and even agree with some of it. I was under the impression that ZFG was employed at the time and lost her job as a result of the publicity the case generated, lost her place to live, was unable to get a new job, etc., I can easily believe those things did happen to her simply because her name is the same. We can't begin to understand what it would be like for anyone named ZFG in the wake of this case, notwithstanding how horrible it must have been in the fever of those moments.

If ZFG had been a person of higher social standing would she be any more damaged? I think the fact that ZFG was barely surviving to begin with garners more of my sympathy. It will always be harder for her now. How many people enjoy sharing a name with a infamous criminal? How many Adolf Hitlers are running around? How about Charles Mansons or Ted Bundy's???? I think all victims of KC should be given some slack and empathy, that includes ZFG. She didn't create the situation, KC did.
 
I wanted to add that I do believe the home is deliberately being let go, both because it holds probably nothing but painful memories now, but also to pay legal costs (maybe not attorney fees to BC, but perhaps they do pay costs incurred).
 
I wanted to add that I do believe the home is deliberately being let go, both because it holds probably nothing but painful memories now, but also to pay legal costs (maybe not attorney fees to BC, but perhaps they do pay costs incurred).

If indeed, this was where Caylee may have been drugged, abused or even worse, why would they want to live in that house? And even the backyard. I would think that karma might make them get out of there as soon as possible. They may be hoping that someone will offer them a home - free of charge ... wouldn't surprise me. Plus it could be a tactic to go into a trial - having lost everything - rather than the perks they receive ...
 
If indeed, this was where Caylee may have been drugged, abused or even worse, why would they want to live in that house? And even the backyard. I would think that karma might make them get out of there as soon as possible. They may be hoping that someone will offer them a home - free of charge ... wouldn't surprise me. Plus it could be a tactic to go into a trial - having lost everything - rather than the perks they receive ...

Oh yes, I can practically smell the martyrdom they will create when this is all done......"Yes, we lost everything defending our daughter - we are so selfless"......:banghead::twocents:
 
Here is a very interesting article from MSN today.......

http://realestate.msn.com/article.aspx?cp-documentid=23390500&GT1=35000

A snip
Should you feel guilty if you walk away?
More than 1 million homeowners chose to stop making mortgage payments and let their homes go into foreclosure last year. These are not people who couldn’t afford to pay. As this trend grows, Americans struggle with whether this is a smart financial move or a moral failure.


That’s due in large part to the sheer numbers of foreclosures, but the percentage of strategic defaults is also on the rise, say the study’s authors.

“We’ve seen a marked increase in this kind of behavior,” says Charles Chung, Experian senior vice president.





By Melinda Fulmer of MSN Real Estate
 
bbm: I can respect your opinion, and even agree with some of it. I was under the impression that ZFG was employed at the time and lost her job as a result of the publicity the case generated, lost her place to live, was unable to get a new job, etc., I can easily believe those things did happen to her simply because her name is the same. We can't begin to understand what it would be like for anyone named ZFG in the wake of this case, notwithstanding how horrible it must have been in the fever of those moments.

If ZFG had been a person of higher social standing would she be any more damaged? I think the fact that ZFG was barely surviving to begin with garners more of my sympathy. It will always be harder for her now. How many people enjoy sharing a name with a infamous criminal? How many Adolf Hitlers are running around? How about Charles Mansons or Ted Bundy's???? I think all victims of KC should be given some slack and empathy, that includes ZFG. She didn't create the situation, KC did.

BBM

Reading your response, it jumped off the page that after being so rudely dismissed by CA & GA, this is the same argument GA uses for not being able to find a job!!! So the publicity argument is good enough for him, but not worthy of ZFG's suffering. AND, the Anthony's brought much of the publicity ON THEMSELVES with their constant media tours. ZFG did nothing to bring any of this on herself.

HELLO!?! Anyone home? talk about ironic
 
FWIW, if the house has no equity, even a judgement will not squeeze money out of it.
But even if there is equity in the home and a judgement attached takes it away from the Anthony's, that is better than the bank taking it because they would at least get some credit for paying down the judgement. If they let the bank take it, they get zero,zip, nada benefits.
What I mean is, trying to tie this foreclosure as a preemptive move to a avoid a potential judgement is a dead end, imo.
 
And they are protected by the Homestead Act. Maybe they just will not want to stay in the home after the trial. And CA may feel she can always go live with her mother after this is all over with. I can see where there would be little incentive to stay in the home after the trial. The two most important people in CA's world would be gone. JMO
 
FWIW, if the house has no equity, even a judgement will not squeeze money out of it.
But even if there is equity in the home and a judgement attached takes it away from the Anthony's, that is better than the bank taking it because they would at least get some credit for paying down the judgement. If they let the bank take it, they get zero,zip, nada benefits.
What I mean is, trying to tie this foreclosure as a preemptive move to a avoid a potential judgement is a dead end, imo.

If ZG's suit is successful, and she is awarded punitive damages, a hefty amount, does that then give her Attorneys access to the Anthonys financial records- income, including the source of income? There may be substantial assets that we are only guessing at, from media 'fees'..?
 
If ZG's suit is successful, and she is awarded punitive damages, a hefty amount, does that then give her Attorneys access to the Anthonys financial records- income, including the source of income? There may be substantial assets that we are only guessing at, from media 'fees'..?
I assume it varies from state to state and from judge to judge as to when financial information is relevant. I would say in some cases they would need to provide that information well before a judgement.
But whenever the defendant provides the financial information it had better be accurate because they will have to swear to it.
 
A house in their area sold for $85,000. They would be on the hook for the remainder and there is no guarantee it will sell. BC is their attorney and I am sure they are doing exactly what he has advised them to do. Either way, there credit is shot and they may want to hold onto those credit cards and their cars and let the house go. It must be hard for them to live there. JMO

I would imagine that the same house in that neighborhood would have sold a lot closer to $200,000 5 years ago. Perhaps they are so far under water that they are choosing to let it go to foreclosure. I can imagine they are paying quite a mortgage, and it will be a while before the house is worth that again.
 
The topic here is about the potential foreclosure. I moved a handful of the latest offtopic posts to the parking lot thread.

Thanks for staying on topic


where this post lands on the thread is random

Sorry, JBean. I'm like that little dog after the "Beggin Strips".
 
OMG that was a visual and gave me a good laugh. thanks LC
 
If ZG's suit is successful, and she is awarded punitive damages, a hefty amount, does that then give her Attorneys access to the Anthonys financial records- income, including the source of income? There may be substantial assets that we are only guessing at, from media 'fees'..?
It depends on who is being sued..is it just Casey or indeed is it official that Cindy was added?
Her suit is against Casey Anthony, who has no interest real or imagined in the deed ( ownership ) of the Hopespring home. Likewise, if the suit is only against Casey...any money Cindy makes is separate and does not affect that suit. If the suit is against Cindy Anthony as well, then yes, her lawyers can come after any source of income that mom has including media deals. A civil judgment does not supercede a mortgage loan. I do think mom making the media deals is why the lawyers want to include Cindy in the suit. Clearly. Whether Casey is convicted or not, Cindy can make any media deals she likes. Without the future media deals there is no blood to get out of this turnip. If you google Golman civil suit collection regarding OJ Simpson you will be amused at the depth and breath they were afforded to collect that judgment....including obtaining the rights to his football memorabilia, and even his "If I Did It" book." That suit...I am no way suggesting to be comparable because Mrs. Gonzalez suit is due to her being harassed, losing her job, getting death threats, etc....whereas ;of course ,the Goldman family's suit was for wrongful death. I am only using it because it illustrates what may or may not be something a civil judgment can attach to. I am not a lawyer.[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Zcawci-pdI[/ame] Apparently this character, Mr. whoever....may have been responsible for setting up some early deals. I think that mom and pop are willingly letting the house go back to the bank for reasons that will later be revealed. Nothing they do seems unplanned...unwise yes...unplanned..no.
 
I'm just curious to know how many tax deductions they took- it they took Casey and Caylee we will know for 100% sure they knew she was not working.
 
I'm just curious to know how many tax deductions they took- it they took Casey and Caylee we will know for 100% sure they knew she was not working.

ZsaZsa, I asked that very thing within months of Casey being charged, and I would still like to know the answer to it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
159
Guests online
3,755
Total visitors
3,914

Forum statistics

Threads
602,585
Messages
18,143,056
Members
231,446
Latest member
VAres67
Back
Top