CA CA - Bob Harrod, 81, Orange County, 27 July 2009 - #15

[ELB]

I worded the time I thought he disappeared wrong. I meant to say that I thought he disappeared between 10 am and Noon, because LE says that at 10 am there was a confirmed call, SIL left around that time and didn't come back until after Noon to let the CL in. The SIL says that when he left, Bob was still there, but when he comes back at 12:15 pm (approx), Bob's gone. SIL says: "Bob became ill" or "Bob went out to run an errand" or "Bob had a Dr's appt." I find all 3 of these statements odd, because why if Bob became ill, would he be gone? and what 81 yro man does an errand or Dr's appt. on foot? Even at my age I take my car. I still think that somebody close to Bob got him in their car and that's how he disappeared. Around this same time another elderly man disappeared, but he was later found (can't remember if he was dead or alive.) That's why I remembered Bob's story on the news and I was hoping for a positive outcome. Det. Rad. states that the details lie in the battle for the money. I'm not sure of this, but if you want to add someone's name to your checking account, I don't know if they have to be there in person or if you have to show proof of their identity. If this is true, Bob had to disappear before Fontelle comes back. I still want to know why the bed was unmade, something that never happened before, especially since Bob was there way after he got up that morning. Might be missing bedding.
You don't have to drive very far out of Placentia to get to open land and steep hills.
The "love of money" is the root of all evil. Money itself is good, if you can handle it right.

 

[Seajay]

Wow this thread is moving fast. The newer poster that mentioned someone might have offered to take Bob to the banks might have something. Forgive me for asking: was AH's locations that morning confirmed?

Second question: besides Bob's kids, where there any other relatives anticipating money?

Lastly: from the previous page: AH getting only $10k. In my family and in many of my friend's families- grandkids get token amounts. A nice piece of jewelry or a little cash. Sometimes NOTHING. Not because grandpa didn't love them- but because there is this idea that the kids get the money and when the kids die, the grandkids will then get it.

BBM for focus: That's the way mine is. We are leaving all our money to our children and what they do with it after that is up to them. Our grandkids aren't in our will. I and hubby have specific things that are going to the grands.

 

[bourne]

It is typical. In addition to the license, you need someone qualified to perform a marriage ceremony to make the license valid and the marriage legal. Just getting a license does not make you married. Most people don't know this. And it sounds like Bob and Fontelle did not either. If you are not using a priest or other qualified person, you use a judge. Judges are usually in the same location as a marriage license office. The clerk in this case was merely clarifying who was going to perform the marriage ceremony.

Actually this is incorrect. A marriage license is valid as long as you've met the requirements to obtain the license, and you've registered with your county clerk and paid the clerk a fee. Even without a ceremony, your marriage license is already valid.

However, for documentation purposes, the legally qualified person (judge, etc.) who officiates your ceremony then must file your marriage certificate with the appropriate recording agency in your county. If the certificate is not filed, you are still legally married, but it may be hard for your county to produce proof of your marriage.

http://family.findlaw.com/marriage/legal-requirements-for-marriage-faq-s.html

 

[deca]

I am still a newbie on this case, but so far here is my work in progress

(from most likely to least likely and with reason why listed)
-AH (tie) strong motive over loans, possible stealing
-JeM (tie) had the opportunity: protect AH, $
-JuM protecting either of the above, $
-daughter R, $
-daughter P, $
--Fontelle, $
-barber, $, resentment, anger??
-random acquaintance, $, sicko
-cleaning lady

this list is totally tentative so pick apart if you want :rockon:

 

[Opie]

Sorry to seem disagreeable, but I do disagree. At one time I worked for a Federal Government agency. We required a Marriage certificate to prove a marriage. A license only shows intent to marry. I read the link noted above and unless I'm misunderstanding that, it states what I've stated here.

As Dennis Miller would say, "of course, I could be wrong."

 

[bourne]

Sorry to seem disagreeable, but I do disagree. At one time I worked for a Federal Government agency. We required a Marriage certificate to prove a marriage. A license only shows intent to marry. I read the link noted above and unless I'm misunderstanding that, it states what I've stated here.

As Dennis Miller would say, "of course, I could be wrong."

I didn't say we don't require a marriage certificate/license to prove a marriage. Read the post again. I was commenting on the CEREMONY part.

The poster said there NEEDS BE A CEREMONY performed by someone qualified in order for the marriage license to be VALID. I was disputing THAT legal fact.

 

[Opie]

I think I see what you are saying. A couple does not need to have a ceremony to make the license (intent to marry) valid. As noted in the link, many states require a waiting period after issuance of the license before the ceremony can be performed. They do, however, need to have a ceremony to have a legal marriage. Did I get that right?

Sorry if I seem to be nit-picky here, but I've worked with words for many years and sometimes things just seem to hit my ear (so to speak) wrong.

You've done a terrific job of catching up here with all the info. I'd hate to be starting in cold at this stage.

 

[Seajay]

Actually this is incorrect. A marriage license is valid as long as you've met the requirements to obtain the license, and you've registered with your county clerk and paid the clerk a fee. Even without a ceremony, your marriage license is already valid.

However, for documentation purposes, the legally qualified person (judge, etc.) who officiates your ceremony then must file your marriage certificate with the appropriate recording agency in your county. If the certificate is not filed, you are still legally married, but it may be hard for your county to produce proof of your marriage.
http://family.findlaw.com/marriage/legal-requirements-for-marriage-faq-s.html

Enlarged and BBM: Loophole!!!!!!

 

[bourne]

Enlarged and BBM: Loophole!!!!!!

Loophole for what? :waitasec: And what's with all the bolding and excitement?

 

[shana]

California Marriage License, Registration and Ceremony Information

Marriage Services (Orange County, CA)

 

[bourne]

I think I see what you are saying. A couple does not need to have a ceremony to make the license (intent to marry) valid. As noted in the link, many states require a waiting period after issuance of the license before the ceremony can be performed. They do, however, need to have a ceremony to have a legal marriage. Did I get that right?

Sorry if I seem to be nit-picky here, but I've worked with words for many years and sometimes things just seem to hit my ear (so to speak) wrong.

You've done a terrific job of catching up here with all the info. I'd hate to be starting in cold at this stage.

It's all good. I love learning too.

Ok, no. All you need in order to be legally married is the marriage certificate/license.

A ceremony is not needed in order for your marriage to be valid. You DO need a marriage officiant to FILE the certificate to a county recording agency so that if someone wants the COUNTY to provide a record that you were married the county will have the documented info. However, you and your spouse should also already have your marriage license (if you had registered for a marriage license and paid the fee and passed the requirements) so you two can use your marriage license as legal proof of your marriage. Your marriage certificate is separate and apart from the county's documentation.

 

[shana]

[snipped with respect, and my bold added}

Lastly: from the previous page: AH getting only $10k. In my family and in many of my friend's families- grandkids get token amounts. A nice piece of jewelry or a little cash. Sometimes NOTHING. Not because grandpa didn't love them- but because there is this idea that the kids get the money and when the kids die, the grandkids will then get it.

Exactly!

And even more so in this instance, because Mr Harrod had just ONE grandchild to remember. That he chose to leave AH a small gift makes good sense to me.

 

[bourne]

I am still a newbie on this case, but so far here is my work in progress

(from most likely to least likely and with reason why listed)
-AH (tie) strong motive over loans, possible stealing
-JeM (tie) had the opportunity: protect AH, $
-JuM protecting either of the above, $
-daughter R, $
-daughter P, $
--Fontelle, $
-barber, $, resentment, anger??
-random acquaintance, $, sicko
-cleaning lady

this list is totally tentative so pick apart if you want :rockon:

I'm totally in agreement with this list. And it's pretty much in my order of preference with respect to who's my #1 POI starting from AH downwards.

Well, except cleaning lady would come before random sicko. But how would s/he get hold of Bob's $?

 

[shana]

I am not condoning AH's having stopped pmts on his home loan once his grandfather went missing, but I can see how he might have chosen to withhold funds until the payee was available to cash the check. :-o

One could suggest this was a convenient excuse.

What transpired thereafter with the entire Trust finances is far more significant, imo.

 

[shana]

I am still a newbie on this case, but so far here is my work in progress

(from most likely to least likely and with reason why listed)
-AH (tie) strong motive over loans, possible stealing
-JeM (tie) had the opportunity: protect AH, $
-JuM protecting either of the above, $
-daughter R, $
-daughter P, $
--Fontelle, $
-barber, $, resentment, anger??
-random acquaintance, $, sicko
-cleaning lady

this list is totally tentative so pick apart if you want :rockon:

I understand how you arrived at this rank-order list, based on what's been posted/discussed.

I would re-order the list, based on what I've learned.

I know it's often repeated here that the daughters are persons of interest (lower-case, argued by opposing counsel in a CIVIL matter). I also know that LE has not officially declared any suspects or POIs; furthermore, LE has not cleared anyone for potential participation in the case of missing Robert Harrod.

jmo

 

[Seajay]

Loophole for what? :waitasec: And what's with all the bolding and excitement?

Sorry, got carried away. I was trying to make a joke about a way later out of a marriage someone wouldn't want. It had nothing to do with Fontelle and Bob, it had to do with me. Like I said, just a little joke.

 

[shana]

I would not be so sure that LE was granted any approval status on the Disappeared episode; in fact, I highly doubt it, based on errors contained within the program.

In addition to filmed interviews having been clipped for the production, and most left on the cutting-room floor, there is the matter of context. What questions were posed to those who answered?

I recognize that a dialog can be snipped for its responses. Without knowing the questions, viewers are not getting the complete story. Instead, they are treated to watching the impact of those snippets placed in the script. The film editor worked at the direction of the producers, and surely they wanted to bring home to I.D. a drama that would rate well.

What about responses from others who chose not to appear?

Also of note: Agnes did NOT say she arrived at noon but instead the narrator did. Fact check!

jmo

 

[MaryNo]

Respectfully BBM

What errors were contained within the program? Could you post your sources that show the facts of the case, so that we might adjust our theories accordingly?

What time did Agnes arrive? Could you post your sources leading us to the correct time, so that we might adjust our timelines?

I'm sure this would help immensely Thanks in advance!

I would not be so sure that LE was granted any approval status on the Disappeared episode; in fact, I highly doubt it, based on errors contained within the program.

In addition to filmed interviews having been clipped for the production, and most left on the cutting-room floor, there is the matter of context. What questions were posed to those who answered?

I recognize that a dialog can be snipped for its responses. Without knowing the questions, viewers are not getting the complete story. Instead, they are treated to watching the impact of those snippets placed in the script. The film editor worked at the direction of the producers, and surely they wanted to bring home to I.D. a drama that would rate well.

What about responses from others who chose not to appear?

Also of note: Agnes did NOT say she arrived at noon but instead the narrator did. Fact check!

jmo

 

[shana]

Respectfully BBM

What errors were contained within the program? Could you post your sources that show the facts of the case, so that we might adjust our theories accordingly?

What time did Agnes arrive? Could you post your sources leading us to the correct time, so that we might adjust our timelines?

I'm sure this would help immensely Thanks in advance!

My post was jmo as I would expect yours is too. As well, I am not suggesting you adjust your theories OR your timelines either, based upon what I offer for consideration.

That I find errors in the program is my prerogative after having researched the case extensively.

Fact: The narrator said Agnes arrived at noon. If you can find a source to confirm, please link it.

jmo

 

[MaryNo]

I'm sure that no one on this forum is required to post links to qualify their questions to be answered.

When you posted with such authority, I was misled into believing you know something other than what we've been shown by law enforcement, and media. My mistake.

My post was jmo as I would expect yours is too. As well, I am not suggesting you adjust your theories OR your timelines either, based upon what I offer for consideration.

That I find errors in the program is my prerogative after having researched the case extensively.

Fact: The narrator said Agnes arrived at noon. If you can find a source to confirm, please link it.

jmo