For love or money?

[ewwwinteresting]

As a point of reference -

In the Michael Peterson case, also local in NC, there was a million dollar or so policy on the wife who was murdered, Kathleen. The insurance company refused to pay out the policy until after the case was totally resolved - after Michael was found guilty. The beneficiary of the original policy was Kathleen's FIRST husband, but, she had completed the paperwork awhile back to change the beneficiary to Michael (althought she never actually signed the paperwork) , so all of that complicated things a little. In the end, the death claim was paid out to both the first husband, interestingly enough, and Kathleen's natural daughter - nothing to Michael.

Of course this was a policy that was in existence for some time, correct? Not one that Michael obtained on her shortly before he murdered her! I'm thinking they wouldn't have paid out unless the policy was existing for some time.

 

[golfmom]

*A Weird Happening* seems to be common language for life insurance policies. I've specifically found this language, over and over again out on the web.

A weird happening can waive the two-year limit: If a beneficiary intentionally killed the insured person, the company can refuse to pay a death benefit no matter how long the policy has been in effect. This is true even if a court has not convicted the beneficiary of the murder.
......

The way I read this, Sharon Rocha wouldn't have even been able to collect on the $250,000 policy that Scott had on Laci. :waitasec:

And I know for a fact that the policy was paid out.

http://www.modbee.com/local/story/10825178p-11600185c.html

Scott Peterson won't give up his claim to more than $250,000 from an insurance policy on his dead wife, even though state law says people who kill their spouses forfeit their rights as a beneficiary.

As a result, an attorney for Laci Peterson's mother, Sharon Rocha, on Tuesday filed paperwork asking the Stanislaus County Superior Court to turn over the money, in spite of the death row inmate's objection.

 

[snapple]

Of course this was a policy that was in existence for some time, correct? Not one that Michael obtained on her shortly before he murdered her! I'm thinking they wouldn't have paid out unless the policy was existing for some time.

Would Raven have been that stupid to murder his wife shortly after obtaining a life insurance policy? Talk about a red flag!

 

[golfmom]

Would Raven have been that stupid to murder his wife shortly after obtaining a life insurance policy? Talk about a red flag!

Well, they moved back in together in May of '04. Any policy purchased after that date is suspect IMHO. Raven can try and say he purchased a policy because Janet was pregnant, but:

1. Raven was the primary bread winner and a large policy on Janet would be completely unncessary.

2. They were obviously struggling financially. Raven began embezzling in July '04. It doesn't make sense buy a policy under these circumstances.

 

[ewwwinteresting]

Well, they moved back in together in May of '04. Any policy purchased after that date is suspect IMHO. Raven can try and say he purchased a policy because Janet was pregnant, but:

1. Raven was the primary bread winner and a large policy on Janet would be completely unncessary.

2. They were obviously struggling financially. Raven began embezzling in July '04. It doesn't make sense buy a policy under these circumstances.

I am just realizing that Raven and Janet were separated in January 2004 so there was 4 or 5 months of the very likely possibility of Raven running up MORE debt. Maybe when they reconciled, Janet didn't know about this extra debt. Instead of being an upstanding guy and telling the truth, Raven started stealing in July 2004 to cover the unknown debt. It's been confirmed that Janet didn't know about the embezzlement and if he was making payments on unknown debt, she wouldn't have noticed the extra money either. Talk about a snowball effect.....which lead right to murder??

 

[OriginalJerseyGirl]

Or even catch up on his tax bill?

Are you clairvoyant, GM??? Or maybe Raven read your idea, and thought, :doh: , "Oh yeah! I can use some trust fund money to pay my tax bill!"

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Big Boy Toys

 

[snapple]

I remember reading that the 'seagull newspaper' is a monthly publication. Any chance someone could get their hands on an Aug edition to see if the paper printed some sort of retraction or clarification?? Would it be too much to hope for that they would print Raven's impending embezzlement charges???

 

[ewwwinteresting]

I remember reading that the 'seagull newspaper' is a monthly publication. Any chance someone could get their hands on an Aug edition to see if the paper printed some sort of retraction or clarification?? Would it be too much to hope for that they would print Raven's impending embezzlement charges???

I know several of us have emailed the newspaper's editor with no response. Maybe more of the posters here can send an email also! Results in numbers?? I'm not counting on them actually printing the truth of this story, but hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised.

 

[ewwwinteresting]

I remember reading that the 'seagull newspaper' is a monthly publication. Any chance someone could get their hands on an Aug edition to see if the paper printed some sort of retraction or clarification?? Would it be too much to hope for that they would print Raven's impending embezzlement charges???

Just received confirmed information that the mormon seagull newspaper for August contained NO update information about raven. I was informed there were no letters to the editor, nothing! Seems our emails and/or phone calls have been ignored and they are not going to correct or supplement the information previously printed.

 

[OriginalJerseyGirl]

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - The word "hurt" in m

 

[golfmom]

Using a memorial fund as a personal fund raiser is outrageous.

Do you think the amount they collected covered Raven's fine for FELONY (not misdemeanor) embezzlement?

 

[LTUlegal]

Using a memorial fund as a personal fund raiser is outrageous.

Do you think the amount they collected covered Raven's fine for FELONY (not misdemeanor) embezzlement?

I think it's pretty sad that CHILDREN were selling lemonade to raise money for this fund so that Raven could buy more toys for HIMSELF! :snooty:

eta: referring back to the article in post #1 on this thread: http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25831&page=1

 

[ewwwinteresting]

I think it's deplorable that raven (and his mother/stepfather?) used janet's murder to raise money. The fuhd was set up at raven's stepfather's credit union. I would think only they could have set up this account. AND to know that they did it within hours of Janet dying a brutal death. She died at 10:55 pm and what, the bank opened at 9:00 a.m., and a fund is set up? This is beyond outrageous.

Ok, what about this? raven confesses to his mother that morning that he killed Janet and his mother realizes she possibly could only have a short time to raise money from this tragedy -- imminent arrest? Does anything else make sense? Why else would a fund be set up so soon and without Janet's family's support? They support the Janet Abaroa Scholorship Fund.....not the Buy Toys For Raven and Pay for his Defense fund!!

 

[golfmom]

It seems obvious to me that Janet's family was uncomfortable with the "Support Raven's New Toys, Pay his Felony (not misdemeanor) Fees, and Pay for His Defense Attorney's Fund" either. Otherwise why would they have pushed starting a scholarship in her name over asking everyone to hand over their money to Raven?

Did the Abaroa's even ask them or consider their feelings when coming up with the lame idea of a *memorial* fund?

 

[OriginalJerseyGirl]

Honestly, I can see someone creating a memorial fund. And if it was a cousin of Raven's, they were probably far enough removed from the situation, (perhaps they didn't know Janet very well), to do so. HOWEVER, IF this fund was set up the next morning, while Janet's family still didn't even know the truth about what happened to her, not only was it jumping the gun, it does seem a bit offensive as well.

Good, thought-provoking point about the scholarship fund endorsed by Janet's family.

 

[golfmom]

Just to pass along an unconfirmed tip I received a long time ago, Raven supposedly had Janet sign some papers just days before her murder. Janet wouldn't come out and say what exactly was in those papers, but her friend felt that Janet was afraid.

Again, I got this from only one source and it is unconfirmed.

 

[OriginalJerseyGirl]

Hopefully time will tell us what was in those papers.

Do you remember when we were trying to figure out the location of some papers mentioned in the search warrant (?)? Did we ever determine if those papers were scattered on the floor or if they were in the closet? Interesting to wonder if there was some paperwork missing that night as well or if those papers may have been scattered in order to account for any missing paperwork should the police determine that something specific was missing.

 

[golfmom]

Hopefully time will tell us what was in those papers.

Do you remember when we were trying to figure out the location of some papers mentioned in the search warrant (?)? Did we ever determine if those papers were scattered on the floor or if they were in the closet? Interesting to wonder if there was some paperwork missing that night as well or if those papers may have been scattered in order to account for any missing paperwork should the police determine that something specific was missing.

You pose some interesting questions regarding the papers scattered JG.

One of the things that rings true about the story of Janet being frightened and signing papers is the fact that co-workers were afraid for her safety. Consider that with just a report on the news that a woman had been murdered in the general area that Janet lived combined with them not being able to reach Janet was enough to send them to her house worried that it was her that was murdered.

So, what exactly was it that triggered this fear in them that it might have been Janet who was murdered? Was it that Janet shared with someone that Raven had her sign some papers and that she was afraid for her safety?

 

[OriginalJerseyGirl]

So, what exactly was it that triggered this fear in them that it might have been Janet who was murdered? Was it that Janet shared with someone that Raven had her sign some papers and that she was afraid for her safety?

Let's hope that if Raven is the perp, that he was stupid enough to have her sign some insurance papers days before her murder, and that he tried to collect on them within days after her murder.

 

[terminatrixator]

I have been pondering this question, and is Raven really that stupid, to have Janet sign papers days before he murders her?????

I mean, I know that he's not even close to being the brightest guy in the world, and his intelligence is quite lacking, but to be that dumb, would leave me to believe, if they do arrest Raven, for Janet's murder, he will be going for a defense based on an extremely LOWWWWWWWWW IQ and wasn't smart enough to know what he was doing.