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

[deca]

Don't have anything really helpful here, just my observations.

So, that was the first time to read that letter. Honestly, I don't have a problem with it, once I divorce myself from the situation. It just sounds like someone who is pissed that paperwork and stuff weren't done appropriately. I come from a family of lawyers, and believe me- letters like this get written every day.

As far as the money. The letter for sure implied a couple of things:1) that Georgia verbally promised the girls money or items and the girls didn't get those and see the proof of Georgia's promises in writing. 2) The girls feel that the money/things promised them are endangered under Bob's care. (of course, these implications might have no basis in truth)

I just keep thinking that this whole family was messed up. I don't know what happened, but at some point in their family history there was a huge disconnect. Maybe all the girls were mama's girls and daddy had nothing to do with them? Maybe mama spoiled them? Maybe the kids were always a point of contention between Bob and Georgia? For some reason, Georgia is the "saint mother" and Bob is "scrooge".

Again, IDK, but how could two people raise 3 greedy, vengeful, money sucking kids if everything was hunky-dory? So I guess what I am wondering is if Georgia or Bob were somehow the genesis of the problem. Not that that excuses the actions of the adult children in any way.:stormingmad:


as far as Bob going out for a walk. Here are my questions: 1) what was his normal walk time. 2) normal path of walking 3) did he pass by AH's or any other family member's house.

I would assume that the neighbors along the walking path all knew him.
A few years ago a elderly neighbor was on his walk, had a heart attack and died a few blocks from his house. Luckily, people on that street knew what street he lived on even if they didn't know his name and were able to guide the police to his house.

 

[zwiebel]

I'll have to try and find it for you, but I believe Bob's friend, CAExile, knew exactly where Bob walked and posted about it. I'm really not sure anyone else would have been in a position to know Bob's exact route or time for his walk. Except another neighbour.

CAExile had already moved far away when Bob disappeared, and as for other neighbours - I can only go with LE here, who don't seem to have any suspicions about neighbours at all. To be honest, Bob doesn't seem to have had much conection with any of his neighbours at all, apart from CAExile. Or, if he did, we haven't heard much from them.

ETA: As I recall, Bob's walk was to the end of his cul-de-sac and back. No further.

 

[suzyq211]

BBM~~~~

She writes like this is HER money. Unbelievable!!!!

During a face to face visit with Mr Harrod on February 28th, I again requested copies of the documents, assuming you had by then contacted him.


...and is she talking about her FATHER??? No money in the world would cause me to write a letter like this about my Dad. Un-freaking-believable!

 

[TDW59]

Bourne, some of the still photos of Bob are incorporated in the show but much of it is an actor playing the part of Bob.
There is more than abundant evidence he was as thrilled as a teenager first in love via his reunion with Fontelle.

CaExile speaks of that also. Bob told him he was getting caught up on his medical care so he could live another 20 years with Fontelle.

We don't know that Fontelle spoke to him that morning, from what she says it sounds like she did not, however LE might have asked her to keep that under her hat.

In the show, Paula strikes me as false on every note.

I waited until now to read the court documents and I don't think I got all of them.
But in this case: your actions speak so loudly I cannot hear what you say!

Thank you all for bringing the poison pen letter forward.

Yes, Z, I was dumbfounded when I saw what appeared on screen.:facepalm:

Bob was generous to a fault with his family. All 3 daughters and his grandson owe their homes to him, as he secured them for them outright or in part. And helped them pay their monthly bills.

Can someone put the deposition of the grandson up here, please?

I am going to have to take a refresher course on my computer skills.

If you read the court documents I did this am about the daughters not fulfilling their duties, with an arrearage of $50,000+...while also excusing them from their debts, I think a much clearer picture of them emerges...as they really are.

I will watch the episode again, tho it just seems I get mad when I watch it.
It's all me, me, me; except for Fontelle.

I lost my son in a tragedy 13 yrs ago and when I think of him (very often), I think of the life he has missed and how much I want him back. My primary thoughts are not about how tough it has been on me.

I also could have filed a civil suit but like Fontelle, it was only him that mattered, I did not want any blood money.

But I have known people who would waste no time to grab everything and run as fast as they could to lawyers and I have to say I don't like them.

IIRC, Georgia passed in 2008 but the poison pen letter came right on the heels of Bob's marriage.
He, himself, called the family meeting to set things straight.

Why couldn't they have communicated with him other than thro an attny.

Didn't know there was a ranting phone call made on a Friday night to attny.
Who does that?

 

[TDW59]

During a face to face visit with Mr Harrod on February 28th, I again requested copies of the documents, assuming you had by then contacted him.


...and is she talking about her FATHER??? No money in the world would cause me to write a letter like this about my Dad. Un-freaking-believable!

Me either Suzy....not in a million years.

I RESPECT my folks way more than that.

I also have certain standards for myself..and infer from that whatever is apparent in this saga.

 

[TDW59]

snipped:JuM's announcement (for that is what it was) to Fontelle that 'Daddy's missing' reveals a couple of things;

That JuM already knew Fontelle was not aware Bob had gone missing.
That JuM already knew no other family member had called Fontelle to tell her.

So as far as I can see, that means JuM must have contacted both her sisters, and her son and discussed Bob's missing status with them, before calling Fontelle. Hence she knew, none of them had let Fontelle know.

Leading me to conclude that JuM was so concerned by what her husband JeM had told her about Bob's disappearance she called all her family members, as well as (according to her own postings) hospitals, coroners offices etc.

But neither she nor JeM were concerned enough to go down to the house to check. Or report Bob missing. Or have any direct contact with LE. Instead they put their son in the middle, to stand outside on the driveway, waiting for LE to do the welfare check that night.

And JuM left Fontelle - the one we all know would have acted straight away - until last. Fontelle was the last person JuM informed, when she should have been the first. It shows a complete diregard of Fontelle's status as Mrs Harrod, imo.

Yet the very next morning, JuM was at the house, smiling for the tv cameras when she explained how she would 'be there to welcome' Dad's new wife. As though Dad's new wife was the most important person to her in the world. After her Dad, of course.
__unquote

I have always thought JuM contacted her sisters, managing what they knew and how they would respond.

And I gave my theory on JuM's role the next day not long ago.

Then how long after that were they telling Fontelle they should never have let her in the house and was advised to kick her to the curb??????????

I have sat with my friend and we have tried to figure out HOW that initial conversation from JeM to Jum could have gone down?
But it comes as no surprise that JuM was fast on the phone to sisters and son....damage containment and PR.

 

[TDW59]

from NPD explanation:


To the extent that people are pathologically narcissistic, they can be controlling, blaming, self-absorbed, intolerant of others’ views, unaware of others' needs and of the effects of their behavior on others, and insistent that others see them as they wish to be seen.[15]
Narcissistic individuals use various strategies to protect the self at the expense of others. They tend to devalue, derogate and blame others, and they respond to threatening feedback with anger and hostility.[16]
People who are overly narcissistic commonly feel rejected, humiliated and threatened when criticised. To protect themselves from these dangers, they often react with disdain, rage, and/or defiance to any slight criticism, real or imagined.[17] To avoid such situations, some narcissistic people withdraw socially and may feign modesty or humility. In cases where the narcissistic personality-disordered individual feels a lack of admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation, he or she may also manifest a desire to be feared and to be notorious (narcissistic supply).
Although individuals with NPD are often ambitious and capable, the inability to tolerate setbacks, disagreements or criticism, along with lack of empathy, make it difficult for such individuals to work cooperatively with others or to maintain long-term professional achievements.[18] With narcissistic personality disorder, the individual's self-perceived fantastic grandiosity, often coupled with a hypomanic mood, is typically not commensurate with his or her real accomplishments.

 

[TDW59]

As far as Bob phoning and being irate with JeM...consider the source.

Or just perhaps, Bob had discovered the theft of hundreds of thousands of dollars by JeM's son????

I will type that out, the deposition, when I find it again.

 

[TDW59]

Well, I thought I would be smart and print out the deposition of Andrew Robert Harrod.
It is 96 pages long and contains all supporting documentation/evidence.

I may run out of ink.

 

[bourne]

I'll have to try and find it for you, but I believe Bob's friend, CAExile, knew exactly where Bob walked and posted about it. I'm really not sure anyone else would have been in a position to know Bob's exact route or time for his walk. Except another neighbour.

CAExile had already moved far away when Bob disappeared, and as for other neighbours - I can only go with LE here, who don't seem to have any suspicions about neighbours at all. To be honest, Bob doesn't seem to have had much conection with any of his neighbours at all, apart from CAExile. Or, if he did, we haven't heard much from them.

ETA: As I recall, Bob's walk was to the end of his cul-de-sac and back. No further.

I heard that Bob was very close to his sister. How many siblings did Bob have, where are they and have they said anything regarding his disappearance? The sister he's supposedly closed to would know his behavioral patterns, e.g., the path he'd generally walk, the times he'd walk, where he liked to go/eat, etc. Why was this sister not in the Disappeared episode?

I've been discussing this case with my hubby (my kids too but my kids try hard not to hear stuff about murders; they're at that young age where they think it's "gross" but giggly funny too). Anyhow, he thinks Bob might be hiding with a close friend/relative in order to test to see which one of his children or friends or Fontelle really loves him...

I disagree with him in that I'm leaning towards the fact that it's likely foul play -- given the fact that Bob's bed was unmade...and a military retiree would not have been so undisciplined...

Then again, if he were depressed, he might have thought WTH I'm just going to up and leave this bunch of fakes...and I'm not even going to make my bed.

I have to cogitate this further.

 

[TDW59]

Bourne,

Please allow me to re-read, re-watch and contemplate your post before I respond. TIA
I hope others will have and express insight into it as well.
LE does classify it as a homicide.

 

[cloudajo]

Aug 11, 2009 - PB
I called my dad that morning by telephone, he had obviously been getting quite a few phone calls that morning. Then I realized that my BIL was there and I DID hear him say he was going to the "hardware store". My dad responded to him in a favorable way. I told my dad that I would let him go and talk to him later. That was the last time that I spoke to him. Times vary as I could not tell you the exact time that I called Dad, I gave an approximate of sometime between 11 and 12 and found later it was probably after 11:30 a.m.

Aug 13, 2009 - PB
LE has looked at D's phone records - know because they did not know which phone call was mine, because I came up as private.

Aug 18, 2009 - Namus (Data entered by daughter PB): Last Known Alive (LKA) entered as 12:00
“He was at home and seemed in good spirits when I last spoke to him somewhere between 11 a.m. - 12pm. His son-in-law was there doing odd jobs as Dads new wife was returning from Missouri on Wed. 7/29/09. Heard son-in-law say he was going to the hardware store. When he returned the housekeeper was waiting outside and Dad was gone. He did NOT take his car, but did have his keys and wallet. No contact or word has been heard from since.”

Oct 10, 2009 – OC Register Article
Harrod spoke to several people on his home telephone the day he disappeared. Police seized those phone records, and they aren't giving out the numbers to anyone.

Oct, 2009 – Reporter from OC Register – Comment Posted Under Article
Officials have said that at 10 a.m. July 27 there was a phone call to Bob Harrod, which is the last time anyone other than Jeff Michaels verified he was at the house. Police are not releasing the content of those phone records.

Oct 21, 2009 – Reporter from OC Register via Email
The last phonecall was recorded at around 10 a.m. So that is the last time anyone can confirm Harrod was in the house other than Jeff Michaels.

Jan 7, 2010 – NBC Article
The pair spoke twice daily by telephone while she was away, most recently Sunday evening, Loomis said.

Sep 30, 2010 - RB
The police have not revealed the phone records but each of my sisters said called Dad early that day, the latest of their two calls was around 11:45, as that call was completed just before noon. Dad gave my sister the impression that he had received a number of calls that morning but, I know Dad did not usually like talking on the phone and would often "rush" callers off. He always acted like he preferred to be left alone, that the telephone was just a bother. Dad had an answering machine but wouldn't turn it on, so .......

April, 2013 - From Disappeared

Fontelle: I called him twice a day. I would call him in the morning and we would talk, and then I would call him in the evening every night, 10 o'clock.

Narrator: But, two nights before her flight, Fontelle has trouble reaching Bob.

Fontelle: I tried to call Bob Monday evening and I didn't get an answer, so I kind of thought maybe he'd gone out in the car to the grocery store and hadn't gotten back yet so I tried again in about 20 minutes. Still didn't get an answer.

[snipped]
Agnes: And he said, "That will be fine, I will be here. Jeff is coming and he's going to take care of a couple of things in the house before Fontelle comes." So, I went to the house, knocked on the door. Nobody answered. I looked in the mailbox because that's where he normally leaves me the key. The key wasn't there, so I sat on the bench in front of the house.

[snipped]
Fontelle: Bob told me that they'd had the meeting and it had been quite argumentative. He was very upset about it. Very upset.


http://www2.ocregister.com/articles/harrod-bob-police-2598739-fontelle-michaels?orderby=TimeStampAscending&showRecommendedOnly=1&oncommentsPage=2#slComments
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Man-81-Disappears-After-Marrying-Childhood-Sweetheart-52086697.html

 

[deca]

What we all wouldn't give to hear the heated argument. Man oh man.
Something big happened that night.

 

[believe09]

I see the opposite side of the coin in the interview clip which was included in the Disappeared show-I see a man who is shy but proud. I look at the film of him in the garden and blowing kisses to Fontelle on the phone, and I see a man who had finally achieved his heart's desire after almost 60 years.

I hope charminglane drives by and gives us an update on Robbie's ex husband. IIRC he told the police that AH and his mountain of debt should be checked out.

 

[TDW59]

(all typos are mine)

As you will see there is a great deal of confusion sorting out the documentation. It can be very confusing.

In one of my lifetimes I did title abstracts for a living. (PITA)...so I may make some notations which will be marked [PN] for personal notation...if I think it may help clarify.

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE

CONSERVATORSHIP OF THE ESTATE )
OF ROBERT MERLE HARROD, ) No. 30-2009-00291267-
) PR-CE-LJC
Proposed Conservatee. )
)

DEPOSITION OF ANDREW HARROD, taken on behalf of Petioner [PN Fontelle Harrod], at 25 East Union Street, Pasadena, California, commencing at 9:49 a.m., on Monday, August 29, 2011, pursuant to Notice, before SHANNON MINOR, CSR No. 12695, a Certified Shorthand Reporter, in and for the County of Los Angeles, State of California.
***

[PN, skipping page notating those appearing...2 attnys for Fontelle, 1 for Andrew & Andrew, Fontelle also present; contains addresses, phone and email for attnys.
Skipping 2 pages of index and exhibits and questions instructed not to answer.]

PASADENA, CALIFORNIA; MONDAY, AUGUST 29, 2011
9:49 A.M.

ANDREW HARROD

called as a witness by and on behalf of the Petioner, being first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

EXAMINATION
BY MR. ALGORRI:
Q. Sir, I take it you're Andrew Harrod?
A. I am.
Q. What is your date of birth?
A. (blacked out)
Q. What is your current residence address?
MS KEMP: I'm objecting to that. There's no relevance. You can communicate with him through my office.
BY MR ALGORRI:
Q. Okay. You live at 408 Windflower Lane in Placentia.
A. No.
MS KEMP: I'm objecting to that.
BY MR ALGORRI:
Q. When did you leave that residence?
A. July 30th or 31st of this year.
Q. Any particular reason you left that residence?
A. Yes, it was transferred back to my aunts.
MS KEMP: Objection, misstates what happened, but I think there was a transfer to the trust; is that correct?
THE WITNESS: That's correct.
MR ALGORRI: Counsel, you're coaching the witness, and I appreciate that. If you could just state the legal basis for your objection.
BY MR ALGORRI:
Q. Your aunts you're referring to are whom?
A. Roberta Brady and Paula Borcher.
Q. Okay. What I'm going to do here today just by means of housekeeping is today you're here pursuant to a subpoena. There was also a notice with a document request. I'll just mark it as A. We'll go through the contents of it later.

(Petitioner's Exhibit A was marked for identification by the court reporter and is
attached hereto)

BY MR ALGORRI:
Q. There's been an objection filed by your attorney Julia Kemp. I will mark that as Exhibit B. We'll come back to that later.

(Petitioner's Exhibit B was marked for identification by the court recorder and is
attached hereto.)

BY MR ALGORRI
Q. Just by means of background information, I take it you're married?
A. Yes.
Q. You have children?
A. Yes.
Q. How many?
A. (blacked out)
Q. Your current employer, sir?
A. (blacked out) and (blacked out) is my employer.
Q. And how long have you been so employed?
A. A little over five years.
Q. All right. At some point in time did you acquire a house at 408 Windflower Lane in Placentia, California?
A. yes.
Q. About what date was that, just roughly.
A. It would have been around the middle of 1999.
Q. Okay. I have here---maybe I should have done it this way. We'll mark this as Exhibit C.

(Petioner's Exhibit C was marked for identification by the court reporter and is
attached hereto.)

BY MR ALGORRI: That grand deed there, it shows a 1999 date. That obviously would refresh your recollection as to when you acquired that property?
A. It's dated June 15th, 1999.
Q. Okay. When you acquired that house, was it acquired using funds from the Harrod Family Trust?
A. Yes.
Q. What was the amount, the sum of money used from the Harrod Family Trust to acquire that copy?
A. I don't recall specifically
Q. All right. Let me move on here to D. I have here--let me just identify it, then I'll show it to you. It says a short form deed of trust and assignment of rents.

(Petitioner's Exhibit D was marked for identification by the court reporter and
is attached hereto.)

BY MR ALGORRI:
Q. And does that document depict the sum of money you recall being used to acquire that house?
A. It does.
Q. Okay, All those moneys (sic) that are--
MS KEMP: Excuse me.
MR ALGORRI: Sure.
BY MR ALGORRI:
Q. There's a sum of money I've highlighted there, 300 and something thousand dollars?
A. 325,000
Q. All those moneys (sic) came from the Harrod Family Trust?
A. I don't recall. I wouldn't believe entirely no.
Q. Do you have an estimate as to how much moneys (sic) came from sources other than the Harrod Family Trust?
A. No, I don't.
Q. Can you tell us what your understanding was at the time your acquired the property, using moneys (sic) in part or in whole from the Harrod Family Trust, what the terms of repayment were to be to the Harrod Family Trust?
A. At that point in time I don't remember the specifics.
Q. Okay. Was there to be, as you recall, any monthly terms of payment?
A. Yes.
Q. What was the sum of money to be paid monthly?
A. I don't recall.
Q. All right. Do you recall the duration of the deed of trust? Was it, say, a 30 year note?
A. I--I don't recall.
MS KEMP: I am going to object on vague and ambiguous as to the date of duration of the deed of trust.
BY MR ALGORRI: Do you recall how much was actually paid for the house in 1999?
A. I belive (sic) the purchase price was 270,000.
Q. Can you tell us why it was that there was a deed of trust for an amount in excess of the purchase price of the house?
A. I can't recall.
Q. Can you tell us whether the amount of money in excess of the purchase price of the house borrowed from the Harrod Family Trust was used to start a business?
A. No, it was not.
Q. All right. Can you identify for us the financial institution that the moneys (sic) were deposited in that were in excess of the purchase price of the house?
A. No, I cannot.
Q. At that point in time in 1999, did you have a bank that you regularly dealt with?
A. I'm sure I did. I can't--I can't recall the specific bank, though.
Q. Okay, Moving on here, we'll mark this as next in order.
MR ALGORRI: I think we're up to E, is it, Ms Reporter.

(Petitioner's Exhibit E was marked for identification by the court recorder
and is attached hereto)

BY MR ALGORRI:
Q. All right. This is--I'll identify it and hand it to you. Short form deed of trust and assignment of rents. And let me show you that document there, sir. You've seen that document before today, I take it?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. Okay. Now, on that there's a sum of money of what? 700 and--
A. 735,000
Q. What was the purpose of acquiring a sum of money in that amount?
MS KEMP:Objection, it misstates the evidence. If you want to ask another type of question. I think that's assuming facts not in evidence.
BY MR ALGORRI:
Q. Okay. Well, do you dispute that there was a deed of trust for $735,000 taken out on that house?
A. No.
Q. Okay. All right. What was the money used for?
MS KEMP: Same question. There was--you're assuming facts not in evidence. There's a deed of trust, but you haven't--
MR ALGORRI: There's been no facts established. We just want to know what the facts are.
MS KEMP: Well, there's no facts that there was money obtained in regards to the deed of trust. There is a deed of trust.
BY MR ALGORRI:
Q. Okay. So you acquired no cash as a result of that deed of trust?
A. I did not say that, no.
Q. You did not say that?
A. No.
Q. Okay. So you take out a deed of trust for $735,000 on your residence. What was your purpose in doing so?
A. My grandfather had offered to refinance the house and had cash he wanted to invest.


END OF PART 1.

Can anyone explain to me how more or less doubling the financing on a house with a family member would be considered a good cash investment for Bob?????????????

The Windflower house must be rented out now??? as if IIRC the trust prohibits the sale of real estate owned by the trust.

 

[Cubby]

I think AH got in trouble with Countrywide and was in pre-foreclosure before Bob bailed him out with the 700,000 or so loan. At the very bottom of the depo is a copy of the money order made payable to Countrywide from the most recent mortgage from Bob.

Early in the depo, or somewhere in the depo, is info about a bankruptcy a year after Bob gave him a mortgage for the purchase of the house.

I wonder if the second (?) mortgage wasn't because Bob had cash he wanted to invest, but rather AH gave him some sob story about getting behind and didn't want his kids, Bob's great-grandkids, to be homeless....

He didn't go from a 250K loan to a 725K loan without taking out any cash.

 

[TDW59]

Thanks, Cubby.
I can easily imagine ARH being in trouble with countrywide.
But "the solution" doesn't match the problem. I'm just really missing something here.

My dearly beloved and long term companion printer decided to skip several pages, so I have had to identify them and re-print them.
I will get the whole thing up for all to see.

 

[TDW59]

Part 2----deposition of Andrew Harrod

[PN, MR ALGORRI CONINUING EXAMINATION)

Q. All right. So you already had a deed of trust for 200 odd thousand dollars based upon that document we've marked as - - let me reach over here - - as Exhibit D. What did you do with the additional whatever the difference is there?
A. There were loans between these to.
Q. Okay. Those loans were made to you?
A. They weren't involving my grandfather.
Q. Okay. They were loans made to third parties?
A. No.
Q. Okay. You're talking about loans, what were these loans for?
A. This loan was paid off. This loan was started. The two were not connected.
Q. All right. So you used the loan marked as D to pay off--
A. No.
Q. Exhibit E, I'm sorry.
MS KEMP: I'm objecting to the mischaracterization. It's a deed of trust, not a loan.
MR ALGORRI: Okay.
BY MR ALGORRI: So you used the deed of trust marked as Exhibit E to pay off D?
A. No.
Q. You didn't. Okay. Now, just so I'm clear here, you got a deed of trust for $735,000; you mentioned that it was to - - for the purpose of loans; am I correct or incorrect.
A. There were -- a portion of it, yes.
Q. Okay. Now these loans, I've never spoken to you about these loans before, I've never met you, what were these loans for?
A. The loan that was - - that was provided - -
MS KEMP: Objection, what the relevance of the question?
BY MR ALGORRI:
Q. You can answer the question.
MS KEMP: No. I'm gonna stop here and ask what the relevance is as to what he did with the money?
MR ALGORRI: He's acquired significant sums of money from the Robert Harrod Trust. We're entitled to know what happened to the money and where it went.
MS KEMP: That's not the question you asked. You asked what they were for.
MR AGORRI: Excuse me, Miss, you're asking for an offer of proof, and I'm being kind and giving you one. Unless there's an instruction not to answer - -
MS KEMP: Unless you tell me the significance - - and if your'd like to read back the question, the question was what they were for. In other words, if you're asking if he went to Europe or if there was medical needs of his family, I don't see the relevance of that. If you want to ask a different question and say, where are those funds now, or-- that's a different question.
MR ALGORRI: Well, we're entitled to know what happened to the money. All we want to know is what happened to this money. Okay?
MS KEMP: How are you - - why are entitled to know what happened to the money?
MR ALGORRI: Because there's been estate money used to do something with that we don't know. What's so complicated about that? So unless that's an instruction not to answer, Counsel --
MS KEMP: I think you need to rephrase your question.
MR ALGORRI: --we can take it up with the court.
No, I'm not. I want to know what happened to the money that he acquired as a result of this trust deed that we've marked as Exhibit E. Simple as that.
THE WITNESS: Do you want me to answer?
MS KEMP: Yes.
THE WITNESS: I only received a portion of the money, and the money went to go pay - - to pay off a loan that I had on the house.
BY MR ALGORRI:
Q: Did you make any payments towards this trust deed we've marked as Exhibit E?
A: Yes.
Q: Now, can you tell me your recollection of what the terms of repayment were?
A: Yes. It was a 40-year loan, five percent, and the payment was approximately 3,800 a month, I think.
Q: All right. These payments, you made them regularly, I take it?
A: Yes.
Q: Were they due at any particular day of the month?
A: I don't recall.
Q: Up until the time of Bob's disappearance, were you ever late or delinquet in paying this 3,800 dollar a month payment?
A: Never
Q: All right. Okay. Now, up until July of '09 you made this payment of $3,800 monthly, is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: And this payment would go to whom?
A: Rob Harrod.
Q: All right. Would you mail it directly to him or would it go to a financial institution?
A: Would go directly to him.
Q: All right. So according to our records --and correct me if I am wrong --up until July--through July of '09 you had made payments of $3,800 monthly towards that deed of trust we've marked Exhibit E; correct?
A: That's correct.
Q: Now, in August of '09 you stopped making payments on that deed of trust; correct?
A: Correct.
Q: Why was it?
A: Because my grandfather was missing.
Q: At that point in time did you have any conversation with your aunts about to whom payment should be made in light of your grandfather being missing?
A: Not that I recall.
Q: Did it ever occur to you back at the time that you stopped making these payments in August of '09 that your grandfather would resurface?
A: Yes.
Q: What was your intention, if you had one at all --
MS. SRIVASTAV: Objection, speculation. You can answer.
MR ALGORRI: Well the question is not even done, but I'll note your objection.
MS SRIVASTAV: I'm just putting it on the record. I'm not telling him not to answer.
MR ALGORRI: Nor can you.
BY MR ALGORRI: What was your intention, if he were to have resurfaced, in terms of dealing with the arrearages owed on that deed of trust?
MS KEMP: Objection, relevance. What is -- what is the relevance of the question you're asking, sir?
BY MR ALGORRI:
Q: Did you have an intent to start repaying him again?
MS KEMP: What's the relevance of that question?
MR ALGORRI: It's going to wasting the assets of the trust. I would think Indu would want to know that as much as I would.
MS KEMP: The specifics are what happened to the money and how much money was paid back. His intentions would not be relevant.
MR ALGORRI: Counsel, if you want to argue the case, we've got a trial date set on that. I'm here to ask questions. Unless there's a valid legal objection and instruction not to answer, let's just go forward.
MS KEMP: I have a lot of issues with the fact that he's not a party to this. He's been a victim of a lot of abuse on the Internet, and he has emotional ties to a grandfather who disappeared. And you're here--
He's not a party to any of these items that you're discussing or any trust matters or conservator matters. I think you have a purpose, I'm assuming, in bringing him in here today, and if your purpose is to discuss what happened to assets in the trust, what his intentions were, what his feelings are today, those are not relevant.

BBM
MR ALGORRI: Okay. Let's do this -- let me just state one thing once and for all: As I see it, he's ripped off the trust for about $700,000. We're entitled to get to the bottom of it. That affects both Indu's clients as well as my client.
We want to know what happened to the money, why he quit paying, and what was his intentions in light of his father's [sic] (PN, sic not by me) disappearance, if he ever intended to resume paying on the note. Okay. That's my offer of proof to you and I'm being generous. I don't have to offer that.
MS KEMP: Well, I am instructing him not to answer the type of question that you're asking him about what his intentions were, what his feelings were.
If you want to ask questions regarding assets of..what you consider are trust assets, than ask him that, but don't try to delve into what his personal feelings were or what his personal intentions were at one time or another because that is irrelevant.
MR ALGORRI: Okay. And your grounds for objection is one of relevance; is that correct?
MS KEMP: It's also invasion of privacy and it's harassment.
MR ALGORRI: Okay.
MS KEMP: There's nothing that you're describing that would be of benefit to you to establish a trust asset.
BY MR ALGORRI: Okay. So on the advice of your counsel you're not going to answer the question; is that correct, sir?
THE WITNESS: Is that correct?
MS KEMP: That is correct.

It's late, I should not have started this so late. need sleep ...will continue and finish tomorrow.

 

[suzyq211]

O/T but Hailey Dunn's remains have been found and identified. I believe someone will find Bob. I hope it will be soon, for Fontelle's sake.

 

[zwiebel]

I was just looking at that, suzyq211. Sounds like an arrest may be made very, very soon now.