CA CA - Bob Harrod, 81, Orange County, 27 July 2009 - #18

[zwiebel]

Here is the contact for the PI Bob's daughters hired, in case anyone wants to ask for the 'latest' update.

http://archangelpi.com/

 

[zwiebel]

Linked in profile of the CEO of Archangel, supposed to be finding Bob Harrod. Not a lot of progress, so far.

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/michael-clarke/9/525/581?_mSplash=1

 

[cloudajo]

Someone claiming to be one of Bob's daughter's; Roberta, I think, posted something like: 'Banquet dinners, yuk!' when she was trying to 'help' people find him.

August 13, 2009: "BTW we checked the refrigerator freezer -- it was full of Banquet Dinners! (Yuk!)"

 

[cloudajo]

Linked in profile of the CEO of Archangel, supposed to be finding Bob Harrod. Not a lot of progress, so far.

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/michael-clarke/9/525/581?_mSplash=1

January 9, 2010
Daughter JuM: Hi Willow, Nothing, we have heard nothing! We hired a P.I. and hopefully will come up with some leads... he is digging.

August 8, 2010
Daughter RB: Our PI was retained to respectfully conduct a thorough investigation in total cooperation with the police with only general milestones being reported back to us.

 

[zwiebel]

I've never been a PI. But if I was, and anyone asked me to conduct a 'respectful' investigation into a missing person case, It would set a dozen red flags flying for me.

I've never heard of a family member of a missing person even thinking of requesting that from a PI. Why would you think they wouldn't be respectful? Sounds like a euphemism for, 'Don't ask anyone any difficult questions'.

As for just asking the PI you hired to report 'general milestones'......I never heard of a missing person's family not wanting to know EVERY detail, either.

 

[zwiebel]

The most difficult question for the last known person to have seen Bob alive - his son in law - seems to be, 'What time did Bob Harrod go missing?'

All three of Bob's daughters, including the one son in law is married to, seem to have studiously avoided asking him that question.

 

[cloudajo]

I've never been a PI. But if I was, and anyone asked me to conduct a 'respectful' investigation into a missing person case, It would set a dozen red flags flying for me.

I've never heard of a family member of a missing person even thinking of requesting that from a PI. Why would you think they wouldn't be respectful? Sounds like a euphemism for, 'Don't ask anyone any difficult questions'.

As for just asking the PI you hired to report 'general milestones'......I never heard of a missing person's family not wanting to know EVERY detail, either.

Exactly.

IMO, hiring the PI was a calculated move in this situation, to show the court that a ‘diligent search was conducted’ to declare Bob dead after 5 years. See below. And Bob probably paid for the PI’s ‘respectful investigation and general milestones.’

2010 California Code
Probate Code
Part 12. Administration Of Estates Of Missing Persons Presumed Dead

[snipped]

12406. (a) At the hearing, the court shall determine whether the
alleged missing person is a person who is presumed to be dead under
Section 12401. The court may receive evidence and consider the
affidavits and depositions of persons likely to have seen or heard
from or know the whereabouts of the alleged missing person.

(b) If the court is not satisfied that a diligent search or
inquiry has been made for the missing person, the court may order the
petitioner to conduct a diligent search or inquiry and to report the
results. The court may order the search or inquiry to be made in any
manner that the court determines to be advisable, including any or
all of the following methods:
(1) Inserting in one or more suitable newspapers or other
periodicals a notice requesting information from any person having
knowledge of the whereabouts of the missing person.
(2) Notifying law enforcement officials and public welfare
agencies in appropriate locations of the disappearance of the missing
person.
(3) Engaging the services of an investigator.
(c) The costs of a search ordered by the court pursuant to
subdivision (b) shall be paid by the estate of the missing person,
but if there is no administration, the court in its discretion may
order the petitioner to pay the costs.

http://law.justia.com/codes/california/2010/prob/12400-12408.html

 

[believe09]

The PI, of which there have been 2 IIRC, was about due diligence imvho. I remember the animated discussion we had regarding billable hours that worked out to about 4 hours per month in (Archangel) search for Bob Harrod. He (the PI) came up in some of the hearings, but IIR the transcript correctly his role was as a body guard to RB during the down to the studs clean out of the house.

Fortunately for LE and any civil actions, PI records are available for subpoena. It will be interesting to see what kinds of instructions were passed along and what kind of services each PI actually provided and I would think that the first PI records will likely be the most relevant. If they exist. Just sayin.

It probably doesn't need to be said, but does anyone really believe that someone would hire a PI and be shut out of the day to day investigation being done? It defies reason and it defies common standards of practice-I have know several, but there are also several who are members of WS. Sheesh.

 

[believe09]

I also seem to remember a reimbursement request some where for a hotel room where the sisters met with Archangel PI. Which in and of itself is bizarre.

 

[believe09]

BTW, regarding the CA Probate Code...good thing Mrs Harrod took care of that notifying the media/newspaper part. And continues to do the same, including national media sources.

This is balance that the daughters don't seem to get-one doesn't put forward a 50K reward poster that discourages information being provided by family members and expect that to be considered the equivalent of tirelessly campaigning via media and court appearances about wanting your husband found.

There are many things here that cant be undone-they cant take back what they put out there on the WWW. They cant take back their actions not just during the days following the disappearance now murder, but also during the last 5 years. It has always been about the money for all of them and what makes that clear is the energy, time and resources they have devoted to acquiring it. I look forward to the day where a forensic audit and a flurry of more court filings uncovers the amount of money Bob has spent on their attorneys not to mention all of the little expenses these women have bled his trusts for. It would be sad if it weren't so disgusting.

 

[believe09]

So, which 'family member' do they think did it then?

This is what it comes down to, doesn't it? It is clear, in black and white, that they believe family was involved. And it seems that they are implying that the family member/members would be motivated by money into providing relevant information.

Go figure.

I guess we can go back and try and figure out who seems to be most motivated by money.

 

[Opie]

There WILL be a reckoning, sooner or later. There has to be. This is so blatant and disgusting.

 

[travelbug]

This is what it comes down to, doesn't it? It is clear, in black and white, that they believe family was involved. And it seems that they are implying that the family member/members would be motivated by money into providing relevant information.

Go figure.

I guess we can go back and try and figure out who seems to be most motivated by money.

One of the most difficult things about this case, and what seems to have kept everyone silent, is that they all are only after the money. Not one family member has posted any sort of loving comments about their father/grandfather or expressed sorrow over his passing. If we view it from purely a financial perspective then one family stands out. There are 2 single sisters, but one sister also has a son and grandchild(ren) who would benefit from distribution of the estate. JMHO but, I think the non-blood relative was persuaded, by his family members, to prevent Bob from adding FH to his accounts. I suppose it is possible that the person was only asked to talk to Bob and convince him to not add FH, but the conversation became an argument. It wouldn't take much to seriously injure a frail gentleman like Bob. :moo:

 

[suzyq211]

This is what it comes down to, doesn't it? It is clear, in black and white, that they believe family was involved. And it seems that they are implying that the family member/members would be motivated by money into providing relevant information.

Go figure.

I guess we can go back and try and figure out who seems to be most motivated by money.

There lies the conundrum...

 

[zwiebel]

Daughter Julie did go on TV to say 'Our father means the world to us' and 'I love you dad'. But unfortunately, her and her husband and sisters' actions since that day contradict the statement.

They tried to get the wife Bob loved out of his house
They went through his house without his permission and possibly contaminated the scene of a crime
They never gave a single, confirmed time that Bob went missing
They stopped talking to media or never started
They pointed blame at someone who police say was cleared of any suspicion
They emptied his house around his wife
They quibbled over paying her any support from her own husband's estate, then tried to make it conditional on her returning to MO
They never organized any searches or asked for help to do so
Someone claiming to be Julie posted particularly nasty things about him
Roberta and Paula have also been less than complimentary about Bob. Roberta told media he was selfish and inconsiderate, while Paula hinted his mind was going.
They seem to have actively discouraged people's efforts to help.

 

[zwiebel]

Julie's shocking list of things she wanted from Bob's house, and the way it was phrased, show clearly she is strongly motivated by possessions, I think.

That could be as important as money in this case, maybe.

 

[zwiebel]

One of the things daughter Julie Michaels demanded from Bob's house, long before he was declared dead, was a Winchester gun. She said that that was because Bob wanted it 'to go' to her son.

I wonder whose hands that gun passed into, at first and then finally? Because it is illegal to have possession of a gun - even if it's left to you - without a license, in CA. Estate planners warn about it.

Weapons also require licenses. They need to be given to someone with a license or placed in trust.
http://blog.ocelderlaw.com/2014/08/planning-for-special-assets-in-fullerton-ca.html

I guess Julie or her son must have had a gun license? Otherwise they broke CA law by taking that gun, and could be prosecuted.

Here is our WS link for the legal document, where Julie Michaels asked for the gun. And a picture of the precise request.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=18179&d=1292952770

 

[zwiebel]

Here is the rest of the list of things demanded by daughter Julie Michaels from Bob's house, On April 8th, 2010. More than four years before he was declared dead. Julie is married to Jeff Michaels. The last known person to have seen Bob alive. Time unknown.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=18179&d=1292952770

1.)

 

[zwiebel]

Next items.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=18179&d=1292952770

2.)

 

[zwiebel]

Next items.

3.)

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=18179&d=1292952770