It will be lawyers that will handle all this and advise both parties. Executors of estates do not just hand money out which can then be construed as "hush money," and certainly as an admission of guilt. If they do start handing out money in cases that really need full legal accounting, they would be unfit for their job, which is to protect the estate for the inheritors, to avoid waste, to be sure everything is text-book copacetic, and not to make inheritors vulnerable in future). In this case, for example, whoever, or whatever group, is in charge of transactions and accounting on behalf of the estate, can not be sure of what entities they would now be dealing with in another country, of the emotions that could be driving a suit, whether personal need for support or yes, even greed on the part of some cousins, or folks who feel entitled to "profit" from VF's death will not get in the mix. So they can give the 100k as a lovely gesture, but it is not theirs to give, probate may take years, sums might be doled out for specific needs...blah blah. Any executors or bank in charge of a trust or trustees who would just write a check against an estate calling it "to be kind" would be negligent. Let's say this is done and then someone in VF's family does file a suit, possibly using some of that money, or blows that money on opening up a mail order business they utterly mismanage so they sue. Now to avoid trial, a settlement is made--those managing the trust/estate have handed it out in an unorthodox manner, creating a "kindness/gifts fund," opening up the inheritors to more claims, setting a precedent, and where might it end? I would imagine they expect there will be a suit, some back and forth over time, meanwhile perhaps the estate tied up, but they will by no means want to put it at risk and encourage more claimants whose cause may or may not be just. Insurance will come in and be tapped first. But opening the door to multiple claims? You know that often the main inheritors are the children. They usually do not have control of the money immediately, not in some huge lump sum, have to ask executors through petition and careful documenting of needed expenses to draw on money beyond their annual or monthly or quarterly amount allotted. Here there is also a company that might have liability and that the estate has investment in or will one day provide capital for. It is complicated and involves several parties, perhaps different forms of liabilities. I doubt very much the inheritors can just draw large amounts of money to show compassion to another victim of this crime when the estate must settle debt, face perhaps suits from other parties (emotional suffering, treatment for PTSD, being put at risk whatever) or that it would be legal for the estate to sell a car and pay off someone in VF's family with the proceeds. As to anonymous contributions to NG's fund, tricky to and ******** is tricky in general. So this is a complex situation despite everyone's best intentions. I do imagine a settlement will be reached, but all expenditures have to be accounted for and assets protected, whether a company's or an estate. I doubt AIW could say we will pay all funeral costs, as Mrs. Figeroa was not in their employ. The estate should be managed in regards to any paying of official claims by competent legal counsel and those claims should be documented and a sum not picked out of the air and sent by wire or ploughed into an informal fund-raiser.
