Found Deceased FL - Taylor Wright, 33, Pensacola, 8 Sept 2017 #1 *Arrest*

[DaleTray]

I would like to know if the story of went to ride horses sounded a little out of character for Taylor. When the two VI's heard about going to a relatives farm to ride did this scenario quickly appear a little off to them? Or did it sound totally plausible? Only the two VI's really could answer this question. If I could determine that answer may help me decide which road best to travel. Taylor's cell phone pinging on the farm could be informative.

 

[JLD333]

I just can't see someone running off to start a new life for such a small amount of money. Taylor has a career and seems competent enough to make money. She has family, friends, her son and lots of options. There was a lawyer retained to take care of her court issues. If she left to start over with just her wallet and her phone (which she would not be able to use) then most of that money would go to clothing, travel, housing and food. It doesn't make sense to me. I mean we're not talking about a million dollars here.

Then why withdraw the money against a court order? Wouldn't she have put it back(or not taken it out at all) if she wanted to get custody? Doing things like that do not serve you well in a custody battle


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bird of Paradise]

Excellent questions and if I may take the liberty of compiling them as I did before to make it easier to get concise answers from our VI. I have added my own indicated by a *. I'm happy to update if everyone feels this is useful. I've condensed some wording but tried to leave the questions as they were written.

-Why did she withdraw the money against a court order?

-Why file for a continuance for a fabricated reason if she was planning to own up to it?

-Was she going to bring the cash to court?

-If so, why not go get the cash before the hearing on the 6th OR..

wait until right before the new date so she's not stuck holding a TON of cash for at least a week or two.

-Did the horse ride sounded a little out of character to Taylor?
When...the VI's heard about going to a relatives farm to ride did this scenario quickly appear a little off to them?

*Fleurde, you were aware that TW was retrieving the cash. What did Taylor tell you she was going to do with it once back in her possession? Bring it home?

 

[FlossyMay]

Then why withdraw the money against a court order? Wouldn't she have put it back(or not taken it out at all) if she wanted to get custody? Doing things like that do not serve you well in a custody battle


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't even know for sure where this money came from or how much of it there was. Maybe she was going to fight to keep it because she felt it was hers. I just don't know. My ex husband owed me thousands at the end of our divorce and he was allowed to make payments. He didn't have to come up with the money right there on the spot.

 

[Gardener1850]

Then why withdraw the money against a court order? Wouldn't she have put it back(or not taken it out at all) if she wanted to get custody? Doing things like that do not serve you well in a custody battle


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can you explain how you know it was against court orders for Taylor to withdraw the money in June? I see the order to distribute, but could an appeal by her lawyer have made it so she no longer had to do that right away? (See NOTICE OF APPEAL EMAILED TO CLERK ON 06/22/17). I'm sorry, I'm probably missing it and I'm no legal expert. I just know appeals can go on for a while and just because there was an order doesn't mean it was the final ruling. If she really took the money out against court orders, then why isn't there a contempt charge after the June distribute order?

 

[JLD333]

I don't even know for sure where this money came from or how much of it there was. Maybe she was going to fight to keep it because she felt it was hers. I just don't know. My ex husband owed me thousands at the end of our divorce and he was allowed to make payments. He didn't have to come up with the money right there on the spot.

This was likely money from a joint account or possibly her ex bought out her share of the house - hard to know. Either way, she was order to disperse it and instead, she withdrew it. If she wanted to fight to keep it, then why not leave it and go through with appeal? A judge isn't going to look favorably upon someone that does that and I can almost guarantee she didn't do that on the advice of her attorney.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jethro4WS]

When did the parties know that the court date had been continued? The timing seems oddly convenient and coincides with her disappearance. (IMO)

I know this sounds paranoid, but what if that affidavit by TW's father was made to corroborate that she had gone missing. He knew she had no plans to come to his aid due to the hurricane because she had not been in contact with him. We don't know what the content of that affidavit was exactly, as we don't have access to the actual court-filed documents.

If you read the docket the entry shows that the petitioner filed that letter with the court - that would be the ex (actually his lawyers). What that means is that the ex (or his lawyers) obtained that letter from Taylor's father. I highly doubt that the ex (or his lawyers) would file such a letter with the court if it was to their detriment.

 

[JLD333]

Can you explain how you know it was against court orders for Taylor to withdraw the money in June? I see the order to distribute, but could an appeal by her lawyer have made it so she no longer had to do that right away? (See NOTICE OF APPEAL EMAILED TO CLERK ON 06/22/17). I'm sorry, I'm probably missing it and I'm no legal expert. I just know appeals can go on for a while and just because there was an order doesn't mean it was the final ruling. If she really took the money out against court orders, then why isn't there a contempt charge after the June distribute order?

Even with an appeal, you can't just withdraw the money. Imagine if a man did that to his ex wife who had custody. Would you look at it the same way?
MOO but if someone does that, it says to me that they arent going to pay either way. Otherwise they would leave it in the account and continue on with the legal process. The appeal was dismissed less than a month later it appears.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JLD333]

Can you explain how you know it was against court orders for Taylor to withdraw the money in June? I see the order to distribute, but could an appeal by her lawyer have made it so she no longer had to do that right away? (See NOTICE OF APPEAL EMAILED TO CLERK ON 06/22/17). I'm sorry, I'm probably missing it and I'm no legal expert. I just know appeals can go on for a while and just because there was an order doesn't mean it was the final ruling. If she really took the money out against court orders, then why isn't there a contempt charge after the June distribute order?

There was a motion for contempt in July.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[iliketotalk15]

I apologize if I've missed this, but is there any verification that TW went to the bank or is this all based on the 'friend's' account?

 

[FlossyMay]

Since it was a joint account, maybe Taylor was afraid he would take it out if she left it there, so she beat him to the punch.

 

[JLD333]

I apologize if I've missed this, but is there any verification that TW went to the bank or is this all based on the 'friend's' account?

I'm sure LE has confirmed this but I think she left some cashiers checks at her girlfriends. That may be what the exhibit is that was listed recently in the case summary. They also put a freeze on her cashiers checks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[skay]

I don't even know for sure where this money came from or how much of it there was. Maybe she was going to fight to keep it because she felt it was hers. I just don't know. My ex husband owed me thousands at the end of our divorce and he was allowed to make payments. He didn't have to come up with the money right there on the spot.

I think this is a pretty valid observation. That someone could withdraw large amounts feeling it belonged to them.. (or even refusing) to pay something via a court order, again feeling it belonged to them. Partial quote from Abu in post #66 below...

I think I mentioned this above, but she gave up custody when it became apparent that doing so was best for Drake. The court commended her courage in doing so, and I agree. As for her behavior: irrational isn't the right word. It makes sense to her, and it makes sense for her objectives. The problem is that her objectives are abnormal. Her priorities in life are pride, adulation from others, and vengeance on those she perceived have wronged her.

If she felt wronged...and pride is, in his opinion, a major priority in her life...it would make a little more sense that she withdrew refusing to pay and jetted.

Still a lot of unanswered questions...just a theory.

 

[JLD333]

9/13: ORDER ON FORMER HUSBAND'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR ISSUANCE OF EX PARTE ORDER FREEZING BANK ACCOUNT AND CASHIER'S CHECKS

10/2: COURT ADMITTED EXHIBIT PETIONER - C - COPY OF A CASHIERS CHECK


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jethro4WS]

Unless parental rights are terminated, custody and visitation are always up for more court intervention at the behest of either parent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Florida has very specific things you have to do concerning any changes to custody orders. In Florida, and every other state, there are temporary orders while the divorce is in progress and then at some point there are final orders. Just because an custody order is a final order does not mean it can be changed. Final orders can be changed but there should be specific things that appear on the court docket.

My purpose in asking that question is that flourde has mentioned more than once that Taylor had paid a retainer to an appellate attorney. I am trying to understand whether or not that could be true. If the custody order was not final there is nothing to appeal. If certain activities do not appear in the docket the appellate court is going to almost certainly toss an appeal. There are time limits and on certain actions and specific legal steps.

If the orders were temporary there should be at least one motion to reconsider on the docket. If the orders were final there should be a petition for a rehearing but that is time limited (15 days). It is not clear from the docket that either occurred.

This is why I am seeking clarification from the other party to the divorce and the custodial parent.

 

[Jethro4WS]

My understanding is that the court had previously frozen her bank account. She withdrew the money in June after her account was unfrozen by the court. IMO, it makes sense she would want control of the money and wouldn't want to put it in another bank account in case another freeze order came. Unless I'm mistaken, the case between her and her ex was not yet settled by the courts. Try looking at things from her point of view. JMO.

The divorce was final and closed in December of 2016 - you will see such an entry in the docket. The discovery of the hidden funds and/or source of income came afterward. This is why you see the docket entries in 2017 that say "RE OPEN".

 

[alexwood]

Even with an appeal, you can't just withdraw the money. Imagine if a man did that to his ex wife who had custody. Would you look at it the same way?
MOO but if someone does that, it says to me that they arent going to pay either way. Otherwise they would leave it in the account and continue on with the legal process. The appeal was dismissed less than a month later it appears.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

She had to withdraw it before it could be distributed. She had some cashier's checks drawn from the funds of that account, and cash also. Maybe the cashier's checks were for distribution, but when she appealed, the distribution was put on hold.

 

[Gardener1850]

Even with an appeal, you can't just withdraw the money. Imagine if a man did that to his ex wife who had custody. Would you look at it the same way?
MOO but if someone does that, it says to me that they arent going to pay either way. Otherwise they would leave it in the account and continue on with the legal process. The appeal was dismissed less than a month later it appears.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not saying one way or the other that it was the right thing to do morally-- I'm saying TW and her ex appear to still be fighting this out in court and I can't determine if her actions were illegal according to the court or not. I find it logical for her to take the money out after her accounts had been frozen, in order to control it. I don't know if we have enough info to say it was "against court orders" since they were still appealing. I find it mostly irrelevant to her being missing since she allegedly took the money out of her bank account back in June. If she wanted to disappear with the money she had several months to make a plan. Instead she left all these loose ends when she disappeared. The only way the money is relevant, IMO, is if she had it, she was in greater danger from anyone who knew she had it. JMO.

 

[JLD333]

She had to withdraw it before it could be distributed. She had some cashier's checks drawn from the funds of that account, and cash also. Maybe the cashier's checks were for distribution, but when she appealed, the distribution was put on hold.

Most people I know just transfer the money...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JLD333]

She had to withdraw it before it could be distributed. She had some cashier's checks drawn from the funds of that account, and cash also. Maybe the cashier's checks were for distribution, but when she appealed, the distribution was put on hold.

And if still doesn't explain why she was going to get the money that day. The day after the filed the continuance.

That scenario just doesn't make sense atleast TO ME with all the other details.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk