Judge’s Ruling – Chicago Tribune Update
The Chicago Tribune story has been officially “updated,” but I would describe the current story as a complete re-write. There is new info, several elements from the previous story have vanished, and overall the story is more poorly expressed. There’s too much to simply quote. So I’ll summarize some of it and quote some of it.
Summary of some important points:
--Sheila’s trust was to be used for the “health, support, education and maintenance” of Heather. Tribune reporter Christy Gutowski claims that Sheila placed her estate in a trust in May, three months before she died. (I'd like to check my notes on this, as I'm not positive that Gutowski is completely correct.)
--The story says that Judge Cohen has “disqualified her [Heather's] Indonesian attorney.” (This is a very strange way to express things. Judge Cohen can disqualify attorneys in his own courtroom, but not in any courtroom in Indonesia. Gutowski is probably trying to say that Cohen won't approve of trust funds going to this attorney, which really is a different matter.)
--Gutowski writes that Cohen ruled that Tommy will not be allowed any access to the trust fund. (Even this strikes me as potentially a mistake. Surely no one at this hearing asked Cohen to fund Tommy, so why would he have to "rule" on this? More likely, at some point Cohen simply made the obvious statement that the trust fund could not benefit Tommy, which would not be a "ruling.")
--The article says that an interim trustee has actually been appointed, but this trustee is not named in the article. The earlier Tribune story, also by Gutowski, said that Cohen “plans to appoint … [an] interim trustee of the estate.” (What a strange change! Why doesn't she name him/her? Was she asleep when this happened?)
Excerpts:
[Judge Cohen] ordered civil attorneys involved in the trust case to work together to find a more reputable defense counsel. [Orange Tabby note: oddly, not one attorney present was named, none of the parties they represent were mentioned, nor were even the number of attorneys offering argument provided.]
In May, von Wiese-Mack named her brother, William Wiese, as trustee with control over the funds until her daughter's 30th birthday.
Wiese, an out-of-state attorney, feared the money would be used illegally for a bribe based on information he received from U.S. authorities about the Indonesian legal system, his attorney said Friday.
But, Cohen noted, with no evidence to support such concerns, Mack is entitled to seek help from the trust. The judge said Illinois' slayer statute, which forbids anyone who unjustifiably causes a death to profit or benefit from that death, is not at issue because Mack has not been convicted. [So, the question I raised earlier today is answered. It seems indeed that the time is not yet ripe.]
The judge quoted directly from von Wiese-Mack's trust in making his ruling. He said "in her mother's own words, ironically enough," Mack's support and health are to be provided.
"There's nothing more important in health than whether you are going to live or die or if your child is going to live or die," [Cohen] said.
http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-82554099/
