CA CA - Bob Harrod, 81, Orange County, 27 July 2009 - # 4

[Cubby]

Please provide a valid LINK.

No rumor please.

Thank you.

How about this ShowMe,
We have PROVIDED links and you seem to skim past them.

How about you reply to your previously posted requests for links,
just one, and we willl happily oblige you - or give you written instructions on how to utilize the WS search features, but no one wants to waste their time replying to your link requests when you don't bother to acknowlege receipt of them - or - replies to your previously posted questions which have been answered.

I will take my time out now.

Cubby

I will take TWO time outs, heck there are 27 outs in a ball game........ and big time ball players.

Go White Sox ( I kinda like the WS, white sox, world series, websleuths, too many WS's out there. ) I kind of dig Ozzie Guillen.... So Go Sox! What else can a Cub fan ask for in mid September?

To quote, GOLD

Quote:
Originally Posted by believe09
Actually, fwiw, any publicity in a missing persons case is gold. It is akin to the lottery. It doesnt matter if it is about the bushes in front of his house-the fact that his name is out there and that there is substantial media is spectacular. We need more. It needs to be even more recognized nationally. Because that is what brings in those little tips that turn things around; that is what causes someone who may be close to the case to be willing to do the right thing and stand up for this 81 year old man who could not have possibly deserved whatever happened to him.

Oh how interesting that ShowME pulled out one of believes' posts - just the same day she posted about speaking to a national media producer about Bobs case, Did anyone NOT expect this?


Great reminder to change the batteries is my smoke detector, and my furnace filter.
and have the furnace cleaned and checked now that fall colors are showing.... Mid September and oh those red Maple's.... and fall colors.

 

[Montjoy]

IIRC, the comments on IS were not at all negative in the very beginning. I've already mentioned my pathetic memory, so hope someone else who was following there can back me up on this. But I recall the daughters initially pleading for help finding their father. It was a bit before it took a darker turn. In retrospect, I would guess that had a lot to do with F deciding to stay in the home and stake her claim. Seems it went downhill from there. Fast.

You do recall correctly -- the initial posts were positive. I tried to illustrate how things started to go south in a previous post today (and how quickly it happened), so that might flush out some of it for you. I agree that F deciding to stay at Bob's place ramped up the nastiness, but that wasn't where it appears (to me) that it started. I would argue that the nastiness started when the daughters started proposing alternative theories for Bob's disappearance (cold feet, the barber). To make those theories more compelling, it appears they chose to say some negative things about their dad. This happened before they started to complain about access to their dad's household effects (although around the same time that they were complaining about how the media paid more attention to F than to them). All JMO, of course.

 

[Fairy1]

How about this ShowMe,
We have PROVIDED links and you seem to skim past them.

How about you reply to your previously posted requests for links,
just one, and we willl happily oblige you - or give you written instructions on how to utilize the WS search features, but no one wants to waste their time replying to your link requests when you don't bother to acknowlege receipt of them.

I will take my time out now.

Cubby

I will take TWO time outs, heck there are 27 outs in a ball game........ and big time ball players.

Go White Sox ( I kinda like the WS, white sox, world series, websleuths, too many WS's out there. ) I kind of dig Ozzie Guillen.... So Go Sox! What else can a Cub fan ask for in mid September?

To quote, GOLD
Quote:
Originally Posted by believe09
Actually, fwiw, any publicity in a missing persons case is gold. It is akin to the lottery. It doesnt matter if it is about the bushes in front of his house-the fact that his name is out there and that there is substantial media is spectacular. We need more. It needs to be even more recognized nationally. Because that is what brings in those little tips that turn things around; that is what causes someone who may be close to the case to be willing to do the right thing and stand up for this 81 year old man who could not have possibly deserved whatever happened to him.

Oh Cubby! If I let the whole White Sox comment go, I will have to give you a pass. NO time outs for you here! It's fair to request links for anything stated here as FACT.

Though actual, officially documented facts are admittedly few and far between here...

And what's good for the goose is good for the gander, huh?

 

[Fairy1]

You do recall correctly -- the initial posts were positive. I tried to illustrate how things started to go south in a previous post today (and how quickly it happened), so that might flush out some of it for you. I agree that F deciding to stay at Bob's place ramped up the nastiness, but that wasn't where it appears (to me) that it started. I would argue that the nastiness started when the daughters started proposing alternative theories for Bob's disappearance (cold feet, the barber). To make those theories more compelling, it appears they chose to say some negative things about their dad. This happened before they started to complain about access to their dad's household effects (although around the same time that they were complaining about how the media paid more attention to F than to them). All JMO, of course.

Thank you Montjoy. I honestly don't remember how soon it went south. I can say that the daughters posting there had a captive and empathetic audience. I suppose that fed into their posts. Even the recent ones.

 

[Cubby]

Oh Cubby! If I let the whole White Sox comment go, I will have to give you a pass. NO time outs for you here! It's fair to request links for anything stated here as FACT.

Though actual, officially documented facts are admittedly few and far between here...

And what's good for the goose is good for the gander, huh?

It is, and I would like ShowMe to at least acknowledge the replies to his -or- her posts?

On the other Note, please refer back to Tricia's post two pages back.

I gotta say one sweeeet thing, in a Big Bopper way, when this thing plays out. It will be BETTER than " ain't got No Money Honey....." it will play out like "Aw you SWEET thing!" -Chantilly Lace.... you know who wrote it!

XXOO

Cubbs - grease for peace! vroom!

 

[Angelo]

You do recall correctly -- the initial posts were positive. I tried to illustrate how things started to go south in a previous post today (and how quickly it happened), so that might flush out some of it for you. I agree that F deciding to stay at Bob's place ramped up the nastiness, but that wasn't where it appears (to me) that it started. I would argue that the nastiness started when the daughters started proposing alternative theories for Bob's disappearance (cold feet, the barber). To make those theories more compelling, it appears they chose to say some negative things about their dad. This happened before they started to complain about access to their dad's household effects (although around the same time that they were complaining about how the media paid more attention to F than to them). All JMO, of course.

Daughter R was the first one to post on IS. Her initial post was benign, basically giving a summary of Mr. Harrod's recent marriage and last day. R started the post with:

"Though Bob was not diagnosed, instances of forgetfulness led family to believe he could have some early signs of dementia. This expressed thought was perpetuated by news coverage."

R's second post includes this passage:

We are all so distressed that we still do not know what happened to him. I'm not so sure why the media made the millionare statement about him, other than to perhaps appeal to his "ego" and entice him to call.

You can see a pattern beginning here.

 

[believe09]

Of course, you are absolutely right, Cubby. But you have to admit, those publicly posted statements have given us insight (such as it is) into the dynamics of this family that we rarely, if ever, see on missing persons cases. They have also made it possible to see questionable details with regard to the timeline and most certainly, a possible motive.

IIRC, the comments on IS were not at all negative in the very beginning. I've already mentioned my pathetic memory, so hope someone else who was following there can back me up on this. But I recall the daughters initially pleading for help finding their father. It was a bit before it took a darker turn. In retrospect, I would guess that had a lot to do with F deciding to stay in the home and stake her claim. Seems it went downhill from there. Fast.

See this as a motivation is questionable to me. What, were they trying to scare her off then? And if so, why take it to the WWW and not handle it privately?

ETA: this is an 80+ year old woman with sight issues correct? Can't be that hard to approach her directly with concerns. Unless they got her back up first? I wonder how those first few days went after she arrived, shellshocked, by the disappearance of her spouse.

 

[believe09]

What I wouldnt give for the phone records! What if, for example, calls were made from Bob's home after 6PM when SIL went home? That would certainly indicate activity from the house...maybe Bob returned and made some calls?

 

[believe09]

In the spirit of fellowship, how about I say that it is my impression that the Harrod Family Trust owns the mortgage on grandson's house, that it also owns another property inhabited by one of the daughters. One would think that both occupants would have continued to make rent or mortgage payments to the trust, but when family is involved it is so easy to forgive things like that especially in times of financial uncertainty, such as layoff, disability or restricted income for other reasons. My memory is not perfect and if this is not the case, well then I apologize for the mistake.

I would like to get back to the discussion regarding the increased media, and what might be available in terms of tools that we can utilize to continue to search for this special man.

 

[cloudajo]

See this as a motivation is questionable to me. What, were they trying to scare her off then? And if so, why take it to the WWW and not handle it privately?

ETA: this is an 80+ year old woman with sight issues correct? Can't be that hard to approach her directly with concerns. Unless they got her back up first? I wonder how those first few days went after she arrived, shellshocked, by the disappearance of her spouse.

FYI, in the caption under the pic of this article, it says F was 74 when she married Bob.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/living/2010985815_disappeared08.html

 

[believe09]

TY cloud for keeping me on the straight and narrow! My opinion is that she is very brave. JMVHO. Who has been paying the bills to date on the house in Placentia? If it is Fontelle, is there a reimbursement plan in place that requires she be reimbursed and has that been followed? Wondering Wondering...

Look I distracted myself. I am going to start the AMW packet. I knew a producer there a while ago and provided he is still working there, we might be able to streamline the process.

Peace everyone!

 

[believe09]

Truer words have never been written b09! You know what they say in the celebrity world - any press is good press!

It is tragic to really see how few missing persons cases EVER make the news or pick up any media at all. I realize the whole Bob + Fontelle angle has been what has put this story in the news and I respect that. Still, a man is missing. Over a year later. And NO ONE is actually looking for him.

There are plenty of people claiming to "miss" him and "worry" about him and want to "find" him. IS ANYONE ACTUALLY LOOKING FOR BOB?

Even if LE is focusing on WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, they are not looking for Bob.

As an aside....I have NO designer shoes ( I HATE shoes entirely). All from Payless or Target (and sometimes Kohl's). And when I'm beating the bushes, I usually have boots on! But thank you, B09! You made me seem fabulous! I am not.

I won't allow even you to say that about yourself Fairy-you ARE fabulous.

 

[suzyq211]

Please provide a valid LINK.

No rumor please.

Thank you.

I remember daughter P posting last year something like " I would think that the one address that he might remember would be mine, because he owns the house."

 

[believe09]

Shall we weed through these together?

http://cr.ocgov.com/grantorgrantee/index.asp

• Grantor: A Grantor conveys whatever title the Grantor possesses in real estate to a grantee, the buyer. Grantor = seller. There are no implied warranties in a grant deed, which is the instrument a Grantor signs transferring title to the new buyer.
• Grantee: Definition: A grantee is the entity receiving title to a piece of real estate. The grantee is the buyer. When the grantee sells the property, the grantee becomes the grantor.
• Reconveyance: If you buy property or a home using a loan from a lender, then the lender places a lien against the property. The lien is put in place when you originally borrow the loan. A reconveyance can remove this lien when the loan has been paid back in full and the property is yours free and clear. A reconveyance must be recorded at the county recorder’s office of the county the property is situated in. The reconveyance to be recorded must have the same information that is on the deed of trust. The deed of trust is a document between the borrower and the lender, and also names a trustee. The trustee is usually a title company, and the deed of trust also records the property that the loan is being used to buy.
• Assignment Rnt: When you rent out a mortgaged property, you may have to sign over an Assignment of Rent agreement to the lender. By doing so, you authorize the lender to collect rent on your behalf if you default on the mortgage.
• Trust Deed: A trust deed is a written instrument which transfers property to a trustee to secure an obligation such as a promissory note or a mortgage. The trustee has the power to sell the real property in the case of a default on the obligation.
• Quitclaim Deed: A quit claim deed transfers to the grantee any and all of the legal rights the grantor has in the parcel of real property. The quit claim deed makes no warranty about the extent of the grantor’s interest in the parcel of real property.

Recording
Date
Document
Number
Name
Reference Name
Title
Grantor / Grantee

​

06-17-1999

1999-00452184​

HARROD AR
TM ​

GRANT DEED

GRANTEE ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452185​

HARROD AR
HARROD ROBERT TR BFC ​

TRUST DEED

GRANTOR ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452185​

HARROD AR
HARROD ROBERT TR BFC ​

ASSIGNMENT RNT

GRANTOR ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452186​

HARROD AR
HARROD ROBERT TR BFC ​

TRUST DEED

GRANTOR ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452186​

HARROD AR
HARROD ROBERT TR BFC ​

ASSIGNMENT RNT

GRANTOR ​

11-01-1999

1999-00763872​

HARROD GEORGIA M TR
SRA​

GRANT DEED

GRANTEE ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452185​

HARROD GEORGIA TR BFC
HARROD AR​

TRUST DEED

GRANTEE ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452185​

HARROD GEORGIA TR BFC
HARROD AR​

ASSIGNMENT RNT

GRANTEE ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452186​

HARROD GEORGIA TR BFC
HARROD AR​

TRUST DEED

GRANTEE ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452186​

HARROD GEORGIA TR BFC
HARROD AR​

ASSIGNMENT RNT

GRANTEE ​

11-01-1999

1999-00763872​

HARROD ROBERT M TR
SRA ​

GRANT DEED

GRANTEE ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452185​

HARROD ROBERT TR BFC
HARROD AR​

TRUST DEED

GRANTEE ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452185​

HARROD ROBERT TR BFC
HARRODAR​

ASSIGNMENT RNT

GRANTEE ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452186​

HARROD ROBERT TR BFC
HARROD AR​

TRUST DEED

GRANTEE ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452186​

HARROD ROBERT TR BFC
HARROD AR​

ASSIGNMENT RNT

GRANTEE ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452184​

HARROD T
TM ​

GRANT DEED

GRANTEE ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452185​

HARROD T
HARROD ROBERT TR BFC ​

TRUST DEED

GRANTOR ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452185​

HARROD T
HARROD ROBERT TR BFC ​

ASSIGNMENT RNT

GRANTOR ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452186​

HARROD T
HARROD ROBERT TR BFC ​

TRUST DEED

GRANTOR ​

06-17-1999

1999-00452186​

HARROD T
HARROD ROBERT TR BFC ​

ASSIGNMENT RNT

GRANTOR ​

11-22-1999

1999-00805937​

HARROD T
AM ​

GRANT DEED

GRANTOR ​

Recording
Date
Document
Number
Name
Reference Name
Title
Grantor / Grantee
08-29-2003
2003-01054451
HARROD AR
HARROD ROBERT TR
RECONVEYANCE
GRANTEE
08-29-2003
2003-01054452
HARROD AR
HARROD ROBERT TR
RECONVEYANCE
GRANTEE
08-29-2003
2003-01054453
HARROD AR
HARROD ROBERT M TR BFC
TRUST DEED
GRANTOR
08-29-2003
2003-01054453
HARROD AR
HARROD ROBERT M TR BFC
ASSIGNMENT RNT
GRANTOR
08-29-2003
2003-01054452
HARROD GEORGIA M TR
HARROD ROBERT TR
SUBSTITUTION TR
GRANTOR
08-29-2003
2003-01054452
HARROD GEORGIA M TR
HARROD ROBERT TR
SUBSTITUTION TR
GRANTEE
08-29-2003
2003-01054453
HARROD GEORGIA M TR BFC
HARROD AR
TRUST DEED
GRANTEE
08-29-2003
2003-01054453
HARROD GEORGIA M TR BFC
HARROD AR
ASSIGNMENT RNT
GRANTEE
08-29-2003
2003-01054453
HARROD ROBERT M TR BFC
HARROD AR
TRUST DEED
GRANTEE
08-29-2003
2003-01054453
HARROD ROBERT M TR BFC
HARROD AR
ASSIGNMENT RNT
GRANTEE
08-29-2003
2003-01054451
HARROD ROBERT TR
HARROD ROBERT TR
SUBSTITUTION TR
GRANTOR
08-29-2003
2003-01054451
HARROD ROBERT TR
HARROD ROBERT TR
SUBSTITUTION TR
GRANTEE
08-29-2003
2003-01054452
HARROD ROBERT TR
HARROD ROBERT TR
SUBSTITUTION TR
GRANTOR
08-29-2003
2003-01054452
HARROD ROBERT TR
HARROD ROBERT TR
SUBSTITUTION TR
GRANTEE
08-29-2003
2003-01054451
HARROD T
HARROD ROBERT TR
RECONVEYANCE
GRANTEE
08-29-2003
2003-01054452
HARROD T
HARROD ROBERT TR
RECONVEYANCE
GRANTEE
08-29-2003
2003-01054453
HARROD T
HARROD ROBERT M TR BFC
TRUST DEED
GRANTOR
08-29-2003
2003-01054453
HARROD T
HARROD ROBERT M TR BFC
ASSIGNMENT RNT
GRANTOR
Recording
Date
Document
Number
Name
Reference Name
Title
Grantor / Grantee
10-19-2006
2006-00706419
HARROD AR
U S BK N A TR BFC BY SRVCR
RECONVEYANCE
GRANTEE
10-11-2006
2006-00673387
HARROD AR
HARROD ROBERT M TR BFC
TRUST DEED
GRANTOR
10-11-2006
2006-00673387
HARROD AR
HARROD ROBERT M TR BFC
ASSIGNMENT RNT
GRANTOR
10-11-2006
2006-00673387
HARROD GEORGIA M TR BFC
HARROD T
TRUST DEED
GRANTEE
10-11-2006
2006-00673387
HARROD GEORGIA M TR BFC
HARROD T
ASSIGNMENT RNT
GRANTEE
10-11-2006
2006-00673387
HARROD ROBERT M TR BFC
HARROD T
TRUST DEED
GRANTEE
10-11-2006
2006-00673387
HARROD ROBERT M TR BFC
HARROD T
ASSIGNMENT RNT
GRANTEE
10-11-2006
2006-00673387
HARROD T
HARROD ROBERT M TR BFC
TRUST DEED
GRANTOR
10-11-2006
2006-00673387
HARROD T
HARROD ROBERT M TR BFC
ASSIGNMENT RNT
GRANTOR
Recording
Date
Document
Number
Name
Reference Name
Title
Grantor / Grantee
03-21-2007
2007-00181113
HARROD AR
HARROD AR
QUITCLAIM DEED
GRANTEE
03-21-2007
2007-00181113
HARROD AR
HARROD AR tr
QUITCLAIM DEED
GRANTOR
03-21-2007
2007-00181113
HARROD T
HARROD AR
QUITCLAIM DEED
GRANTOR
03-21-2007
2007-00181113
HARROD T trust
HARROD AR
QUITCLAIM DEED
GRANTEE
03-21-2007
2007-00181113
HARROD AR trust
HARROD AR
QUITCLAIM DEED
GRANTEE
03-21-2007
2007-00181113
HARROD AR
HARROD AR TR
QUITCLAIM DEED
GRANTOR
03-21-2007
2007-00181113
HARROD TJ
HARROD AR TR
QUITCLAIM DEED
GRANTOR
03-21-2007
2007-00181113
HARROD TJ TR
HARROD AR
QUITCLAIM DEED
GRANTEE
Recording
Date
Document
Number
Name
Reference Name
Title
Grantor / Grantee
09-16-2008
2008-00435334
HARROD GEORGIA M EST
HARROD ROBERT M TR
AFFIDAVIT
GRANTOR
09-16-2008
2008-00435334
HARROD GEORGIA MAY EST
HARROD ROBERT M TR
AFFIDAVIT
GRANTOR
09-16-2008
2008-00435334
HARROD ROBERT M TR
HARROD ROBERT M TR
AFFIDAVIT
GRANTOR
09-16-2008
2008-00435334
HARROD ROBERT M TR
HARROD ROBERT M TR
AFFIDAVIT
GRANTEE
09-16-2008
2008-00435335
HARROD ROBERT M TR
HARROD ROBERT M TR
GRANT DEED
GRANTOR
09-16-2008
2008-00435335
HARROD ROBERT M TR
HARROD ROBERT M TR
GRANT DEED
GRANTEE
​

​

​

​

 

[believe09]

I know that post did not translate the way it does on the website. And I do not know how to fix it .

However, I did redact the full names of the grandson, his wife and some other people who are not named in this case on any level.

Go to the link to see the proper layout of the information!!!

Or you can take my word for it.

 

[believe09]

Another thing; in the referenced public records above, I noticed in 1999 grandson's name was listed as M and then on other documents it appears as Harrod. I wonder if the name change occurred sometime in 1999?

This is the transaction I am referencing...sorry again about the formatting issues...
06-17-1999 1999-00452186
HARROD T HARROD ROBERT TR BFC
ASSIGNMENT RNT GRANTOR
11-22-1999
1999-00805937

HARROD T
AM

 

[ShowMe]

How about this ShowMe,
We have PROVIDED links and you seem to skim past them.

How about you reply to your previously posted requests for links,
just one, and we willl happily oblige you - or give you written instructions on how to utilize the WS search features, but no one wants to waste their time replying to your link requests when you don't bother to acknowlege receipt of them - or - replies to your previously posted questions which have been answered.
......SNIPPED.......

My apology for not acknowledging responses to questions.
I did not realize this was required.

Most of the responses included information provided anonymously.

I sincerely doubt total credibility and question the motive of any anonymous source. IMHO

Thank you so much for your helpful comments and sorry to "waste your time".

 

[Angelo]

Shall we weed through these together?

http://cr.ocgov.com/grantorgrantee/index.asp

So Mr. Harrod was giving financial support to his grandson as well as his three adult children.

We have never heard anything from the grandson. Any plea for information about his missing grandfather. I wonder why.

 

[ShowMe]

So Mr. Harrod was giving financial support to his grandson as well as his three adult children.

We have never heard anything from the grandson. Any plea for information about his missing grandfather. I wonder why.

I do not recall any evidence of financial support of any family members being presented.

There were indeed a number of real estate transactions posted that it's hard to determine if they superceded one another or were for numerous different properties, however I did not see any initials of the adult children on that list.

Your guess is as good as mine.

 

[cleo612]

I am really curious as to whether or not any of these properties that are mentioned in the Trust Deeds, etc. are located near or on Harrod Road where those unidentified remains were found.