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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
From the legal document we have that contained the list of things wanted from the house, I think that was where Fontell had objected to Bob's daughters being appointed conservators of his estate. But then an agreement was reached that Fontelle would be allowed to receive a small monthly allowance from her husband's estate, if she dropped the objection.

But then Bob's daughters had backtracked after the deal was done and tried to make it conditional upon Fontelle leaving her marital home?

But that wasn't an objection to the will, and thinking about it, I don't think Bob's will could have been filed until now, as he wasn't declared dead? I'm really not sure how all this works.
 
This case is so tragic especially for Fontell (and for Bob Harrod of course). No-one really knows who is obsessed with money until something sets it off. In this case it was Bob Harrod marrying for the second time. One (or more) of his family could see an intruder coming into their presumed inheritance. Maybe Bob Harrod had already seen the greed in his family. I read where he had nothing to do with them for a while. I doubt he ever thought it would be a danger to him. It is obvious he saw marrying Fontelle as a chance of happiness in the years he had left. Unfortunately his family thought otherwise, they saw Fontelle as an intruder coming into their presumed inheritance. Look at how they have treated her.
Whatever financial difficulties they had would be known to LE investigating the case.
 
Sorry, I just saw this. The caveat freezes all proceedings and forces the matter into Probate Court. I had to do this when my mother passed and my sister in law and brother took a truck and a trailer to my mother's house, literally hours after she passed, and removed many items from the home. My SIL also took my mother's credit cards and purchased all new appliances for her own home. [washer/dryer, refrigerator, oven/stove/microwave] I was actually able to go directly to the Probate Court, pay a fee and file the caveat myself.

If I were advising Fontelle, from my own personal experience,I would tell her to have a caveat filed. What his children did was to force a matter of settling an estate before the person was deceased. Any lawyer who helped them should be investigated by the ethics committee of the jurisdiction's Bar Association. The children knew what they were doing could be disputed and relied on them bullying Fontelle.

zwiebel said:
I'm having to look up what caveat means in legal terms!
Click to expand...
 
I just hope there are no more attempts to get Mrs Harrod out of Bob's house. Not just for her sake, but for anyone who tries to do it too. No matter how it's spun, it just looks really, really bad trying to get rid of an elderly woman who wants to wait in her husband's home, until he's found.

She is the only family member trying to keep his case in the spotlight, and can only do that because she has chosen to stay in OC, rather than returning to her native Missouri. Anyone who tries to force her back there is trying to close down the search for Bob and should be investigated, in my opinion.
 
This is just sickening. All this list reads is, "Money, money, money, money- Oh, and more money please."

Seeing the picture of the daughter and her stupid, silly grin. this is just so upsetting. :tantrum:
 
Money in this case seems to have really fogged and damaged Bob's cause.

But a good thing is that money is not an issue when trying to find a missing person, as so many people are willing to help without payment. And also, although money can buy a good defence lawyer, it can't buy a jury or not guilty verdict in CA. And I am sure the person/s who disappeared Bob will find themselves in court one day soon.
 
zwiebel said:
Money in this case seems to have really fogged and damaged Bob's cause.

But a good thing is that money is not an issue when trying to find a missing person, as so many people are willing to help without payment. And also, although money can buy a good defence lawyer, it can't buy a jury or not guilty verdict in CA. And I am sure the person/s who disappeared Bob will find themselves in court one day soon.
Click to expand...

I sure hope this is a valid prediction. As the saying goes, from your lips (fingertips in this case) to God's ears.
 
Now he is declared dead, I'm awaiting Bob's obituary. His daughters wrote a wonderful one for the first Mrs Harrod, so is it reasonable to hope they'll do the same for Bob?
 
Reasonable, yes, but highly unlikely, IMO.

You do have a way with words, zwiebel.
 
I just read that the body of a NY soldier is coming home, who has been missing since 1944. Closest family members are all long dead of course, but an 82-year-old nephew will welcome him home. He last saw his missing uncle when he was 8. He recalls his uncle kissing him goodbye, and the trauma that followed.

It's strange and maybe not fair the way the pain and responsibility of a missing person in the family passes down the generations. But it does.
 
Laughing said:
Pawn tickets often go along with money troubles, and geographically close faily member ARH was known to have $$$ troubles. Hhhhhmmmm....
Click to expand...

Money problems & a key to Bob's house.
 
You would have thought Bob's only grandson AH, living just a few blocks away and whom he was very close to, would have had a key, wouldn't you?

But from the police welfare check report on the night Bob went missing, it almost seems like grandson was determined to show them he did not have a key to Bob's house, and would never enter it without Bob's permission. He seemed to have made a point of telling police in the report that he'd borrowed the key from a neighbor who held it for Bob. And of course, he waited outside on the driveway to meet them, as though he was afraid to go into the house by himself...or thought some sort of crime might have been committed there.

None of it makes any sense, in the context of AH's father leaving the same house just hours earlier, seemingly without a concern in the world that Bob had disappeared from under his very nose, so to speak.
 
Next day, daughters who didn't seem so close to Bob - who he'd even paid to stay away from him for 6 months according to a friend and LE - had no hesitation about entering Bob's house without permission. Not only that, but invaded his bedroom and removed bedding, and invited media inside.

Daughter Julie in her interview made it very clear she thought Bob had disappeared and was very concerned, and said the rest of the family were too. So that's both a mom and her son (grandson AH) who were immediately, very worried. But Julie was never asked (because media weren't aware of the full details at the time) why her husband had not shared that concern. Why he'd just carried on working upstairs after Bob vanished; why he'd reassured the worried housekeeper Bob must just have popped out for a walk. Or something. Why he'd just closed up the house and left, never to return, and left it up to his son to accompany police on a welfare check later that night.

Also, why he only told police about the 'suspicious' car he'd watched driving up and down outside during his second interview; and how on earth he managed to 'forget' such an important event when Bob disappeared; why it didn't trigger alarm bells.
 
I don't find son-in-law's version of what happened that day believable myself. Which leads me to wonder what reason he could have to be untruthful.

It's the kind of thing juries are often asked to consider in trials, and make up their minds about. Thankfully, they usually seem to come to a commonsense conclusion.
 
I'm quite convinced LE knows exactly who is responsible here. In this case, I think LE simply hasn't reached the 'beyond reasonable doubt' threshold. I'd rather LE wait until they are confident with their reaching that threshold.

No way would we want to see those responsible acquitted.

Justice will be served in this case, even if it takes a little longer than we hoped.
 
Whose son is Andrew Harrod? Is he Julie and Jeff's son? Why would his last name be Harrod, then?
 
Jmoose said:
Whose son is Andrew Harrod? Is he Julie and Jeff's son? Why would his last name be Harrod, then?
Click to expand...

He had his name legally changed to ARH. Interesting, particularly in light of the number of notarized documents associated with his many loans that were executed by "RH". JMHO
 
Jmoose said:
Whose son is Andrew Harrod? Is he Julie and Jeff's son? Why would his last name be Harrod, then?
Click to expand...

It's peculiar. Julie (Bob's youngest daughter) and Jeff Michaels are Andrew Harrod's parents. Only Jeff Michaels wasn't always known by that name, as he changed it from Finke/Fink. Can't recollect now. Julie seems to have changed hers too, to Harrod-Michaels with a hyphen, when it suits her.

Then their son Andrew Michaels, who had all those complicated loans with Bob that edged towards a million dollars, changed his middle and last name, so he became Andrew Robert Harrod. In his court deposition, it was revealed that it may have led to some accidental confusion with Bob's financial advisor. Andrew somehow ended up reading an email or maybe two, meant for Bob.

I'm sure Andrew Michaels AKA Andrew Robert Harrod informed anyone who made that mistake straight away though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 110 more.
Total: 2,142 (members: 111, guests: 2,031)

Online statistics

Members online
111
Guests online
2,031
Total visitors
2,142
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,774
Messages
18,129,710
Members
231,140
Latest member
Marcia.C108
Back
Top