Could also be that his inheritance was held in some kind of trust.
Even though he is an adult, perhaps it was willed that he be given access to
funds at age 30, or something, and he burned through savings.
Maybe he even financed everything on credit.
Another possibility is that the will stated that cash and corporate resources be given
to the mother, and then doled out to the son in increments.
http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...nd_behind_toronto_philanthropists_murder.html
Although less likely in a father-son relationship, the possibilities remind me of the murder of philanthropist Glen Davis (see Star article above). Even though his nephew was in the "presence" of wealth, it was not his for the taking, and he killed when he was not given cash by his uncle that he didn't earn but felt entitled to.
Maybe DM was not as flush with cash as one would imagine, even though it was in the family.
Even though he is an adult, perhaps it was willed that he be given access to
funds at age 30, or something, and he burned through savings.
Maybe he even financed everything on credit.
Another possibility is that the will stated that cash and corporate resources be given
to the mother, and then doled out to the son in increments.
http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...nd_behind_toronto_philanthropists_murder.html
Although less likely in a father-son relationship, the possibilities remind me of the murder of philanthropist Glen Davis (see Star article above). Even though his nephew was in the "presence" of wealth, it was not his for the taking, and he killed when he was not given cash by his uncle that he didn't earn but felt entitled to.
Maybe DM was not as flush with cash as one would imagine, even though it was in the family.