CA CA - Bob Harrod, 81, Orange County, 27 July 2009 - #12

[dreamweaver]

It's almost Christmas 2012.
In 2008, four years ago, Robert Harrod celebrated his last Christmas. His wife of many years had died earlier that year.

Six months later, June 2009, Robert Harrod decides to marry again.
Seven months later, July 2009, he 'disappears.'

It would be a wonderful Christmas gift for many of us if he was
found.

 

[zwiebel]

I'm guessing the vehicle would have been forensically checked at the same time the house was, in 2011?

But before you ask Oriah, I have no idea if that would have included K9ers, let alone what sort.

I don't want to seem simple but I'm going to anyway; when someone goes missing and LE wants to search a house/vehicle/building and the owner says no, why does LE have to produce such good cause to obtain a warrant? Isn't the fact that someone refuses to help evidence enough that their property should be searched?

What good reason could there ever be for refusing, and what are the benefits of having laws that allow people to do this? Anybody?

 

[zwiebel]

What a loyal friend to Bob you have been, dreamweaver. I second your wish.

It's almost Christmas 2012.
In 2008, four years ago, Robert Harrod celebrated his last Christmas. His wife of many years had died earlier that year.

Six months later, June 2009, Robert Harrod decides to marry again.
Seven months later, July 2009, he 'disappears.'

It would be a wonderful Christmas gift for many of us if he was
found.

 

[Oriah]

I'm guessing the vehicle would have been forensically checked at the same time the house was, in 2011?

But before you ask Oriah, I have no idea if that would have included K9ers, let alone what sort.

I don't want to seem simple but I'm going to anyway; when someone goes missing and LE wants to search a house/vehicle/building and the owner says no, why does LE have to produce such good cause to obtain a warrant? Isn't the fact that someone refuses to help evidence enough that their property should be searched?

What good reason could there ever be for refusing, and what are the benefits of having laws that allow people to do this? Anybody?[/quote]

BBM- I hate to say it but I have come across a few good reasons for a refusal of private property searches. Certainly people have the right to refuse; but equally important- they are informed ahead of time that any evidence gained from a private property search might be admissable in a case? Maybe that is the problem in Mr. Harrod's case?
Idk. Thoughts, anyone?

 

[zwiebel]

I'm guessing the vehicle would have been forensically checked at the same time the house was, in 2011?

But before you ask Oriah, I have no idea if that would have included K9ers, let alone what sort.

I don't want to seem simple but I'm going to anyway; when someone goes missing and LE wants to search a house/vehicle/building and the owner says no, why does LE have to produce such good cause to obtain a warrant? Isn't the fact that someone refuses to help evidence enough that their property should be searched?

What good reason could there ever be for refusing, and what are the benefits of having laws that allow people to do this? Anybody?[/quote]

BBM

BBM- I hate to say it but I have come across a few good reasons for a refusal of private property searches. Certainly people have the right to refuse; but equally important- they are informed ahead of time that any evidence gained from a private property search might be admissable in a case? Maybe that is the problem in Mr. Harrod's case?
Idk. Thoughts, anyone?

My thoughts are that option should be banned. It's like having an option to conceal a crime. I cannot understand it.

 

[zwiebel]

Oriah, why don't your quotes come out in a box?

 

[Oriah]

Unfortunately it is what it is. Rights to private property and all of that. Doesn't make it right, but makes it right by law.
In a sense, it also makes it actually more exposed by law. Mvhoo but should someone deny (for example) SAR access to private property, then it sure puts LE on alert. Kwim?
Maybe we have a verified attorney that can come in?

 

[Oriah]

Oriah, why don't your quotes come out in a box?

No clue, lol.

 

[mikkismom]

I'm guessing the vehicle would have been forensically checked at the same time the house was, in 2011?

But before you ask Oriah, I have no idea if that would have included K9ers, let alone what sort.

I don't want to seem simple but I'm going to anyway; when someone goes missing and LE wants to search a house/vehicle/building and the owner says no, why does LE have to produce such good cause to obtain a warrant? Isn't the fact that someone refuses to help evidence enough that their property should be searched?

What good reason could there ever be for refusing, and what are the benefits of having laws that allow people to do this? Anybody?

Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Based upon English Law. :seeya:

Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[zwiebel]

See, I thought US law had the same basis as English law. Common law, I think? But I have rarely heard of police in England being unable to search a property because someone said no. I wonder if this is a matter of interpretation or civil liberties are being ignored in England?

Wouldn't put it past us - we have freedom of information, but a whole load of 'classified documents' that people can't see in England, are freely available in the US. People used to have to get on a plane to see them but the internet's sorted that one out. Laughable really, but legislation still hasn't caught up.....

 

[zwiebel]

Oh, England. I look up warrants and get an example where a bunch of 'heretics' are tied up over a bonfire in London with the kindling about to be lit and the Queen dies. So does their death warrant. Next Queen Elizabeth refuses to renew it and they all get to go home.

Very interesting but about 450 years out of date. Like those funny wigs our barristers/attorneys and judges get to wear. Back to Bob. Can anybody point the way to the date Bob's daughters actually collected all their clutter from his house? I can't find it.

 

[believe09]

It's almost Christmas 2012.
In 2008, four years ago, Robert Harrod celebrated his last Christmas. His wife of many years had died earlier that year.

Six months later, June 2009, Robert Harrod decides to marry again.
Seven months later, July 2009, he 'disappears.'

It would be a wonderful Christmas gift for many of us if he was
found.

lease:

Great to see you here, dream :loveyou:

 

[believe09]

I'm guessing the vehicle would have been forensically checked at the same time the house was, in 2011?

But before you ask Oriah, I have no idea if that would have included K9ers, let alone what sort.

I don't want to seem simple but I'm going to anyway; when someone goes missing and LE wants to search a house/vehicle/building and the owner says no, why does LE have to produce such good cause to obtain a warrant? Isn't the fact that someone refuses to help evidence enough that their property should be searched?

What good reason could there ever be for refusing, and what are the benefits of having laws that allow people to do this? Anybody?

I have seen cases where people are reluctant to cooperate because of other issues. Lets say, for example, that you would like to be cleared of being involved in the disappearance of a loved one. BUT, you happen to be raising marijuana in your house.

See the dilemma?

We had a MP case where husband wished to be ruled out, but the DA had to agree to a limited search warrant because there was a situation being investigated by the husband's employer. Clearly, husband was not interested in LE finding anything that might help that employer...if you catch my drift.

On the other hand, people dont like to cooperate because it would not be in their best interest to cooperate in a case where foul play is suspected.

 

[zwiebel]

I do, kindaaa, see the problem. Although myself, it wouldn't occur to me to protect myself before looking after the interests of a missing loved one. But also, isn't there a rule or law or something about evidence and search warrants? That you can't use a warrant issued for one potential crime to uncover evidence related to another?

I should look this up, I know. Just afraid it's not going to be half as straightforward as it appears to be.

ETA: And I do, totally see why people would not co-operate when foul play is suspected and they are implicated. That's why I think it would be great if LE could make them co-operate!

 

[mikkismom]

Oh, England. I look up warrants and get an example where a bunch of 'heretics' are tied up over a bonfire in London with the kindling about to be lit and the Queen dies. So does their death warrant. Next Queen Elizabeth refuses to renew it and they all get to go home.

Very interesting but about 450 years out of date. Like those funny wigs our barristers/attorneys and judges get to wear. Back to Bob. Can anybody point the way to the date Bob's daughters actually collected all their clutter from his house? I can't find it.

O/T - Your QE reference reminds me of my favorite TV show - Black Adder :floorlaugh:

On topic. The daughters seemed pretty 'determined' to get 'their' stuff back.

jmo

 

[zwiebel]

Mr Z has to translate Black Adder for me - I don't get it! Seriously though, I toyed with studying law for a long time, was accepted at the University and, apart from Torte Law, what really swung me against it was those wigs. I knew I wanted to be a barrister. And I knew whatever I told myself, when it came down to it, I would never, ever put one of those things on my head. Just silly.

Still looking for the precise day daughters collected their beds, cars, computers and TEACUPS from Bob's house. I think an attorney was there so I'm going to look through the legal docs, rather than trawling endless threads.

 

[zwiebel]

This is really irritating. On Dec 1, 2010, Mr Algorri (FH attorney) pesonally attended the inventory of the house. Then I think, from Dec 8 the collection had to be done within 20 days. But I can't find the actual day!

Can anyone even sort of recall a post or thread about this? What can I search for?

 

[believe09]

Fortunately for Bob, consent is clearly available for Carnation Dr and his car because clearly it was given when OC Sheriff CSI processed everything.

Now, assuming that the girls took Bob's things and put them in storage, it seems reasonable that they would consent to those items being either searched by LE or they would allow HRD dogs to take a look around.

Anything to further the investigation, right?

 

[zwiebel]

Grrrr

Calling all Placentia locals! Did anyone see a removal/ storage truck in Carnation drive on a date in 2010 that I have yet to determine because I can't find it?

But the date doesn't really matter. You remember it. Winter 2010. Nearly a year and a half since Bob went missing, his wife still living in the house and suddenly his daughters are there, stripping the house and discarding the stuff they didn't want like trash, on the lawn. Really strange. You wondered what in the world was going on. They were going to leave their Dad's wife without sheets? Teacups?

And the vehicle they loaded their spoils into? Too much for a single vehicle. So it had to be several vehicles. Or a truck. Probably hired from a local storage business, with a name printed in big, bold letters on the side. Maybe a familiar one to you?

Now, make Oriah really happy. Shut your eyes and just remember that name.

 

[zwiebel]

Fortunately for Bob, consent is clearly available for Carnation Dr and his car because clearly it was given when OC Sheriff CSI processed everything.

Now, assuming that the girls took Bob's things and put them in storage, it seems reasonable that they would consent to those items being either searched by LE or they would allow HRD dogs to take a look around.

Anything to further the investigation, right?

Fat chance.
Sorry, that was impolite. I'm still irritated about that date.
I think there is a chance one might, if she's got any sense in her head.
The other two?
You're joking.