shefner
Member Since 2008
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2008
- Messages
- 7,086
- Reaction score
- 15,407
I know I am in the minority group here when I say I do not see any family involvement connection in this case. I have just seen no evidence to support it. Of course I respect everyone's opinions and know everyone has a right to state their own opinion about any case here.
It just doesn't make sense to me that Sills would say 'attempting to financially gain' if he was thinking the children were involved and I have never picked up on him believing the family is involved. He seems to have been in close contact with them when they came down..via phone when they went home, and when they came back when he released the home back over to the children.
Maybe I would possibly think differently if S&R were younger and if the hit man or whoever had left both bodies there to prove that both were dead so the Estate could be opened so it could be executed. But I cannot reconcile the fact that Shirley was taken and submerged, weighted down in 48 feet of water and hidden away and connect that fact up with a family wanting to kill both of their parents to get their assets.
If financial gain was their motive then that just doesn't make sense. It is counter productive to even getting the Estate open. And I firmly believe whoever put Shirley on the bottom of the lake never ever expected her to rise. If they had then they wouldn't have gone through all the trouble and risks to begin with to put her there.
If Shirley had remained missing none of her legal rights would have been set aside. It would take up to 5-7 years before a Judge would declare her legally deceased and in the meantime the estate would be suspended in limbo. So by then if Shirley and Russ had lived they would have probably died of natural causes in their 90s.
Now I know it is common as rain to suspect family members. I cant remember one case where that didn't happen even though very often it turned out in the end that the family members had no involvement whatsoever.
I think sometimes that is done because none of us knows the family members personally so we conjure up in our own minds how we think they are. I never see family members in this same situation ever get the approval of the masses on MBs.
It just makes no sense to me they would be involved. Even Sills says this may be someone the Dermonds aren't even close friends with but were acquainted somehow.
Imo, this wasn't done for robbery or items that were in the home but it makes more sense if the children were really the ones involved then they would have made sure the hit man ransacked the home as if robbery was the motive.
IMO
Allow me to defend myself by saying that I never once said the word, "Family," in my post. I was simply outlining the parameters given to us by LE (except for that last little tag...which I was simply pondering).
I do not know why anyone who had something to gain financially would place Mrs. D's body in the lake instead of leaving it there in the home for LE to find. In order for anyone to gain anything financially, both Mr. D and Mrs. D would need to be located. Matter of fact, not one red cent can come out of any of their accounts until the legal process has come full circle....even if someone has a joint account.
So that is something worth much consideration. I think someone wanted to throw LE off. They purposely made this look or seem like a hit. And of course, whomever did this had to know that the lake would be searched....and Mrs. D would be found.