Josh Powell Money Trail (transfer of 7K)

[oceanblueeyes]

I wonder if he gave the 7K to his Pastor and told him to hold it for him.

He may have even told him that if something ever happened to him this money was to be used for his burial expenses.

He then transferred the rest of the money to his sister.

IMO

 

[karen7868]

I wonder how many more 1000's of dollars did he transfer to his sister (which I assume is Alina)?

 

[rotterdam]

He sent the email about turning off the utilities a few days before he blew the house up, if I recall correctly.

If I am correct, I think that he was trying to divert his various supporters' attention from his true plans. If I had been his sister and had gotten an email outlining how to turn off the utilities, etc, I would assume that he was preparing against the eventuality of being arrested and held in jail.

Not too unreasonable under the conditions.

And that would also explain any new changes in mood or behaviour: he was getting stressed out about the possibility of arrest.

Give people an obvious explanation and they are less likely to think of a highly unlikely scenario: planning to kill his children and blow up the house. And so, less likely to take action in time to stop him.

He was obviously a planner and good at misdirection.

In view of his professional skills, programmer/website designer, he planned this logically over time I think and all by himself. Meticulously with no loose ends and possibly even back up plans/recovery plans. Who knows, there could have been failed/aborted attempts in the past. Similar to a computer program. This time he had a successful execution.

 

[hollyblue]

I think the sister thought he was going to leave with the boys during this visitation and didn't realize he planned to kill himself until she got the last email. Just my thought.

What's really odd is the voicemail he left at 10:30, per Dateline. That was an hour and a half before the children arrived. Was it a call for help that never came...or again part of his plan?

 

[hollyblue]

I think the sister thought he was going to leave with the boys during this visitation and didn't realize he planned to kill himself until she got the last email. Just my thought.

Even in a murder investigation? I am also curious.

I could see trouble if she gained access to it (theft) after his death illegally or family squibblings if she coveted the monies for herself if it was intended for some other purpose. I'm curious too.

In Gail Palmgren's case, she had sent her sister around 17K for her to hold and it was to be used later for her temporary living expenses while going thru separation/divorce. Shortly after her missing when the husband found out, he called and demanded the monies back. I don't believe she HAD to return it and don't know what the final outcome was, but I'd bet she started a fund of some kind on her own for Gail's children after the wreck of Gail's jeep was found.

 

[gwenabob]

Let me ask everyone this. Suppose a person were dying in the hospital and they had $100,000 in the bank, One day before death, he got on his laptop and transferred all $100,000 to 10 relatives in $10,000 increments. Next day he dies, and the hospital tallies up a $50,000 bill. Who will pay? The patient has zero money. He "gifted" it the day before. Is that fair? Is that right? Shouldn't the hospital who cared for him in his last days get paid what is owed? Of course they should! The money should be returned to the estate so that those who have legitimate claims can be paid monies owing. I believe a court would agree with me.

In Josh's case, the money should be returned so that creditors of Josh's (landlord, ins. company, possible lienholder on his auto, plus his and his boys' last burial/cremation expenses) can be properly dealt with. It is not right that his siblings get money and the people who have been financially harmed do not. That is a basic doctrine of fairness.

 

[AngelWings444]

The transfer of $ can be contested because clearly, Josh wasn't in his right mind when he did it. IMO, a judge will order the return of the money to his estate due to this fact alone.

JMO

 

[mysteriew]

Let me ask everyone this. Suppose a person were dying in the hospital and they had $100,000 in the bank, One day before death, he got on his laptop and transferred all $100,000 to 10 relatives in $10,000 increments. Next day he dies, and the hospital tallies up a $50,000 bill. Who will pay? The patient has zero money. He "gifted" it the day before. Is that fair? Is that right? Shouldn't the hospital who cared for him in his last days get paid what is owed? Of course they should! The money should be returned to the estate so that those who have legitimate claims can be paid monies owing. I believe a court would agree with me.

In Josh's case, the money should be returned so that creditors of Josh's (landlord, ins. company, possible lienholder on his auto, plus his and his boys' last burial/cremation expenses) can be properly dealt with. It is not right that his siblings get money and the people who have been financially harmed do not. That is a basic doctrine of fairness.

Fair and what is legal is two totally different worlds. Any creditors that JP had can sue his estate. And their attorneys can bring the money transfers to the courts attention. But what is the court will decide is questionable.

Everybody has a responsibility to pay their bills. But that doesn't mean they won't spend their money or give it away instead of paying those bills. It is their money and their right to do as they wish with it. A court can look at what they did with their money and decide something else. But that doesn't always mean they will.

 

[elmomom]

He may have even told Alina that his plan was to leave town to avoid prosecution without the kids, and prepared her for that. Could have pre-arranged the money transfer and everything with her. It would make his message of "I'm sorry, I can't live without my children" make more sense in light of what he actually chose to do, as well.

 

[mrsu]

I'm betting he hid the money somewhere in Steve's house to find. It was said on Dateline or 20/20 that the rental house appeared to be staged with photos to look like a loving home, but that it had came to light that Josh was only there for the visits, and that he really lived at Steve's house. So the email about where to find his money. I'm betting somewhere at Steve's house. JMO

 

[mysteriew]

I'm betting he hid the money somewhere in Steve's house to find. It was said on Dateline or 20/20 that the rental house appeared to be staged with photos to look like a loving home, but that it had came to light that Josh was only there for the visits, and that he really lived at Steve's house. So the email about where to find his money. I'm betting somewhere at Steve's house. JMO

I have read that he withdrew the money and that he transferred the money to another account. Does anyone know for sure which he did?

If he withdrew the money, I would say to look somewhere around the utilities. That could be why he was talking about shutting off his utilities.

 

[mrsu]

I have read that he withdrew the money and that he transferred the money to another account. Does anyone know for sure which he did?

If he withdrew the money, I would say to look somewhere around the utilities. That could be why he was talking about shutting off his utilities.

He did both. Again on Dateline or 20/20 (can't remember which, watched both) they said he withdrew $7000 and transferred thousands to his sister Alina.

 

[mysteriew]

He did both. Again on Dateline or 20/20 (can't remember which, watched both) they said he withdrew $7000 and transferred thousands to his sister Alina.

Then I would guess to look around the utility boxes at Stephens house.

Because the murder/suicide was planned. If he worried about the utilities he would have called and arranged to have them shut off while he was making the other arrangements.

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

Let me ask everyone this. Suppose a person were dying in the hospital and they had $100,000 in the bank, One day before death, he got on his laptop and transferred all $100,000 to 10 relatives in $10,000 increments. Next day he dies, and the hospital tallies up a $50,000 bill. Who will pay? The patient has zero money. He "gifted" it the day before. Is that fair? Is that right? Shouldn't the hospital who cared for him in his last days get paid what is owed? Of course they should! The money should be returned to the estate so that those who have legitimate claims can be paid monies owing. I believe a court would agree with me.

In Josh's case, the money should be returned so that creditors of Josh's (landlord, ins. company, possible lienholder on his auto, plus his and his boys' last burial/cremation expenses) can be properly dealt with. It is not right that his siblings get money and the people who have been financially harmed do not. That is a basic doctrine of fairness.

Fair has nothing to do with it. It is legal. If monies/assets that used to be a decedent's were pulled back into the estate, then joint ownership and trusts would not exist; they would be irrelevant and useless. If the patient in your example had a joint bank account with his Aunt Bertha, upon his death the account would become Aunt Bertha's in its entirety, without being subject to claims by the patient's creditors. Aunt Bertha may feel morally compelled to pay any outstanding debts, but she is not legally compelled to do so.

Likewise, if the patient had all his assets in a revocable living trust, upon his death the trust becomes irrevocable, the assets are not part of his estate, and creditors are SOL.

 

[gwenabob]

Fair has nothing to do with it. It is legal. If monies/assets that used to be a decedent's were pulled back into the estate, then joint ownership and trusts would not exist; they would be irrelevant and useless. If the patient in your example had a joint bank account with his Aunt Bertha, upon his death the account would become Aunt Bertha's in its entirety, without being subject to claims by the patient's creditors. Aunt Bertha may feel morally compelled to pay any outstanding debts, but she is not legally compelled to do so.

Likewise, if the patient had all his assets in a revocable living trust, upon his death the trust becomes irrevocable, the assets are not part of his estate, and creditors are SOL.

We are not talking about joint monies in this situation or in Josh's.

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

We are not talking about joint monies in this situation or in Josh's.

My apologies if I was unclear. I was drawing a parallel.

Probate courts do not pull assets into the probate estate if those assets were no longer owned by the decedent at the time of death.

Another parallel... OJ actively transferred his assets out of his name, and the Goldman's were not able to "undo" any of those transactions to collect on their judgement.

There are only very limited circumstances, with a very high burden of proof, where a court will "undo" a transaction. Transferring assets in anticipation of death is very common and not something a court would act to "undo."

 

[GrainneDhu]

In view of his professional skills, programmer/website designer, he planned this logically over time I think and all by himself. Meticulously with no loose ends and possibly even back up plans/recovery plans. Who knows, there could have been failed/aborted attempts in the past. Similar to a computer program. This time he had a successful execution.

I think you are correct.

My hunch is that he had some sort of criteria in mind, along the lines of "if the court orders me to take a polygraph, then I will kill myself and the boys." Something like that. And then his criteria was fulfilled and he carried out his plan.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if he did some experimenting, such as sending an email or voicemail to specific people asking for an immediate answer, in order to figure out how long it would take for each person to get the message. Rehearsal type stuff.

Tangentially, this makes me wonder if LE did any investigation of camping trips or expeditions prior to Susan's disappearance. I've always thought there must have been an element of... surprise? spontaneity? to her death or he would have come up with a more convincing scenario (for instance, had her disappear on a Friday or Saturday night, rather than a Sunday, which looked downright suspicious from the very beginning).

But what if he'd been planning for sometime but then something happened to trigger him to act sooner than he had planned? If he had been planning, I think he would have rehearsed parts of his plan ahead of time. Such as figuring out how to carry a 140 body, how far he could carry it, places he could do so without leaving evidence, etc.

 

[gwenabob]

My apologies if I was unclear. I was drawing a parallel.

Probate courts do not pull assets into the probate estate if those assets were no longer owned by the decedent at the time of death.

Another parallel... OJ actively transferred his assets out of his name, and the Goldman's were not able to "undo" any of those transactions to collect on their judgement.

There are only very limited circumstances, with a very high burden of proof, where a court will "undo" a transaction. Transferring assets in anticipation of death is very common and not something a court would act to "undo."

We'll just have to respectfully disagree. I think a judge would rule that the money is still part of the estate if there are creditors placing claims that are more than the estate is worth. People try to do this with bankruptcy too, and the courts do pull money back into the estate. I guess we shall see. It is also possible the creditors in this case won't think any recovery will be worth their while.

 

[GrainneDhu]

We'll just have to respectfully disagree. I think a judge would rule that the money is still part of the estate if there are creditors placing claims that are more than the estate is worth. People try to do this with bankruptcy too, and the courts do pull money back into the estate. I guess we shall see. It is also possible the creditors in this case won't think any recovery will be worth their while.

The issue is more complicated than bankruptcy court because it is highly unlikely that anyone Josh Powell gave his money to had agreed to assume financial responsibility for his debts.

Frankly, the amount of money in question sounds like it was relatively small--$7K in cash and "thousands" in a transfer or transfers. I'm assuming that the transfer(s) were also less than $10K to avoid the bank notifying the feds. Unless it adds up to $20K or more, it's unlikely to be worth anyone's time to litigate the matter. People who litigate over less are usually doing so for emotional reasons rather than pragmatic ones.

 

[rotterdam]

Let me ask everyone this. Suppose a person were dying in the hospital and they had $100,000 in the bank, One day before death, he got on his laptop and transferred all $100,000 to 10 relatives in $10,000 increments. Next day he dies, and the hospital tallies up a $50,000 bill. Who will pay? The patient has zero money. He "gifted" it the day before. Is that fair? Is that right? Shouldn't the hospital who cared for him in his last days get paid what is owed? Of course they should! The money should be returned to the estate so that those who have legitimate claims can be paid monies owing. I believe a court would agree with me.

In Josh's case, the money should be returned so that creditors of Josh's (landlord, ins. company, possible lienholder on his auto, plus his and his boys' last burial/cremation expenses) can be properly dealt with. It is not right that his siblings get money and the people who have been financially harmed do not. That is a basic doctrine of fairness.

Man, may be I have a warped sense of justice. But if I would be in the hospital or even at home and pretty well knew I was on my way out shortly, I would be busy giving cash/stuff away to my kids/favorite relatives, friends, favorite charities etc.
Dangerous to be terminal sick and have some liquid assets and/or cadillac type of health insurance. Unless you want to be subjected to every test/life lengthening procedures that can bring in revenue. Sorry, have no empathy for folks making 6 figure salaries while I have loved ones that can barely make it.