NC NC - Sarah Long, 41, Davidson, 19 Jul 2014

[Miss Muffet]

Since she really did will everything to this new boyfriend and the husband was abusive, isn't it possible she willed everything to her new boyfriend because she feared her husband might kill her and she didn't want him to get a penny more from her estate than required by law to a spouse? I'm just thinking how abusive husbands become homicidal in divorces, especially when their wives have new boyfriends. Wouldn't it be something if the husband set it up to look like the boyfriend did it?

 

[OldSteve]

Since she really did will everything to this new boyfriend and the husband was abusive, isn't it possible she willed everything to her new boyfriend because she feared her husband might kill her and she didn't want him to get a penny more from her estate than required by law to a spouse? I'm just thinking how abusive husbands become homicidal in divorces, especially when their wives have new boyfriends. Wouldn't it be something if the husband set it up to look like the boyfriend did it?

Interesting theory - yet so much suggests otherwise, looking back thread at what's been said...
Sad thing, IMO, because this was rules suicide initially, the crime scene was not processed enough... I wondered about the bullets in the gun being checked for finger prints, or even if they were wiped clean... no mention of what was found out about her cable router - if device other than her accessed thru it..

 

[Miss Muffet]

Interesting theory - yet so much suggests otherwise, looking back thread at what's been said...

I did read the entire thread. The whole time I was wondering why nobody was focused on the husband. I try to look past the obvious.

Granted, the boyfriend seems suspect since he may have been the last to see her, was the person who reported her missing, and showed up a few days later with paperwork showing she signed everything over to him.

The cancer issue doesn't raise alarms for me. It would have if there was no signs whatsoever of medical problems. However, since there was pre-cancer, the boyfriend didn't pull this out of the blue. It's very possible she exaggerated her medical problems for attention.

Her signing everything over to him indicates to me she wasn't healthy mentally. It seems she truly did sign everything over to him since the courts are requiring his authorization to release funds to the husband.

I'm not saying she committed suicide, but I think unstable mental health of the victim could explain much of the things that leave us scratching our heads.

Meanwhile, there's an estranged husband who was abusive.

 

[iamnotagolem]

Please tell me that her estate is locked down until her murder is solved. I can't imagine anything being paid out to the boyfriend or the husband while either or both seem like legitimate suspects.

 

[Miss Muffet]

Please tell me that her estate is locked down until her murder is solved. I can't imagine anything being paid out to the boyfriend or the husband while either or both seem like legitimate suspects.

An article linked above indicates the boyfriend authorized some funds to be distributed to the husband.

 

[OldSteve]

I did read the entire thread. The whole time I was wondering why nobody was focused on the husband. I try to look past the obvious.

Granted, the boyfriend seems suspect since he may have been the last to see her, was the person who reported her missing, and showed up a few days later with paperwork showing she signed everything over to him.

The cancer issue doesn't raise alarms for me. It would have if there was no signs whatsoever of medical problems. However, since there was pre-cancer, the boyfriend didn't pull this out of the blue. It's very possible she exaggerated her medical problems for attention.

Her signing everything over to him indicates to me she wasn't healthy mentally. It seems she truly did sign everything over to him since the courts are requiring his authorization to release funds to the husband.

I'm not saying she committed suicide, but I think unstable mental health of the victim could explain much of the things that leave us scratching our heads.

Meanwhile, there's an estranged husband who was abusive.

I see your points - well taken! I can see why there's been no arrest so far.... I believe she did sign everything over to the BF, and thus created the motive...

 

[south fishy]

I find it odd that if she really left this new 'boyfriend' all of her money, and the motive was to f-u her soon to be ex- husband, why in the world did she just not leave it to her father...or siblings....or niece/nephew.....or friend....or charity???

 

[Miss Muffet]

I find it odd that if she really left this new 'boyfriend' all of her money, and the motive was to f-u her soon to be ex- husband, why in the world did she just not leave it to her father...or siblings....or niece/nephew.....or friend....or charity???

My guess is leaving it to a boyfriend is a bigger f-u than all the other options.

 

[1&2&3]

If the courts required the BF's authorization to release funds to ex, the will had to be legal. But that seems strange that the court is releasing money to anyone. JMO. Wonder what the money was for? Perhaps it was to pay for her funeral expenses.

 

[OldSteve]

If the courts required the BF's authorization to release funds to ex, the will had to be legal. But that seems strange that the court is releasing money to anyone. JMO. Wonder what the money was for? Perhaps it was to pay for her funeral expenses.

Why does he have to give anything to ex? Who is executor of her estate? Even if ex was named exec in old will, BF can claim he should be since there's a new will, no?
If ex is threating to contest will, then might explain as a settlement...

 

[Miss Muffet]

Why does he have to give anything to ex? Who is executor of her estate? Even if ex was named exec in old will, BF can claim he should be since there's a new will, no?
If ex is threating to contest will, then might explain as a settlement...

The will specifies the executor. Since the boyfriend authorized distribution of funds, the boyfriend is the executor. He would need to distribute funds according to the specifications of the will and the law.

In many states, spouses can't write spouses entirely out of wills, a certain percentage of the marital property automatically goes to a spouse. Below is a link for North Carolina explaining this. Since they were only separated, and not divorced, he is still her spouse and his portion is protected by law.

As a result, it doesn't seem odd to me that the boyfriend has distributed some funds to the husband. There are no hidden meanings here aside from it becoming clear that the will must have been valid since the court is recognizing the boyfriend's authority regarding the will.

http://www.danbrady.com/articles_elective_share.html

Anyone who considers the boyfriend being named in the will as a motive for the boyfriend should also consider the divorce is a similar motive for the husband. After divorce, the husband wouldn't get any of her estate. He'd get a portion of the estate when dividing assets in the divorce. If she hadn't made a new will giving everything to the boyfriend, the husband would have likely inherited the entire estate. And I'll bet my last dollar the husband had NO IDEA she had written a new will.

As a result, inheritance is an equally strong motive for the husband as the boyfriend. If you ask me, the husband had many more motives than the boyfriend. He risked losing a ton of money in the divorce, he would have likely inherited the entire estate if she died without writing a new will, he was abusive, and his wife had a new boyfriend.

 

[OldSteve]

Respectfully snipped from ^^ just for discussion sake...

As a result, it doesn't seem odd to me that the boyfriend has distributed some funds to the husband. There are no hidden meanings here aside from it becoming clear that the will must have been valid since the court is recognizing the boyfriend's authority regarding the will.

Agree the court found it valid, but IMO, that does not mean it cannot be contested, and going to a higher court... as in my state:
http://info.legalzoom.com/statute-limitations-contesting-new-jersey-4178.html

Anyway, to avoid a court fight, that might be reason to gives something to ex....

 

[SweetT]

I didn't think it was legal to give away any marital assets until a LEGAL divorce /separation was done. I would have thought it was illegal for her to give the BF anything unless her current husband and her had already split the marital assets legally. ?? This does not make sense to me. I mean how many times have we heard about folks giving away a house or car etc for a dollar just to screw over the ex..or soon to be ex, this is why I understood that certain laws were put into place..To keep this very thing from happening.

 

[SweetT]

How do all these people see her walking her dog but noone hears a .357 going off?

 

[SweetT]

Hmmmm.... interesting and really cold on both the ex-BF and the ex-HB parts. Sharing the estate? I am not saying they conspired, but wth. Also, who in their right minds leaves everything to a dude you've been dating for 8 WEEKS? I don't buy it.

Plus that WIll would have had to have been written prior to her death right? So even less than 8 weeks.

 

[Miss Muffet]

Respectfully snipped from ^^ just for discussion sake...

Agree the court found it valid, but IMO, that does not mean it cannot be contested, and going to a higher court... as in my state:
http://info.legalzoom.com/statute-limitations-contesting-new-jersey-4178.html

Anyway, to avoid a court fight, that might be reason to gives something to ex....

The boyfriend would be silly not to reach an agreement with the husband because the husband is entitled by law to a percentage of his wife's estate regardless of what the will says. I provided a link explaining that. One way or another, the husband legally deserves money from that estate.

The main point of my last post is the husband had more motives than the boyfriend. They both share the same motive of inheritance (since the husband likely didn't even know there was a new will), and the husband has even more motives on top of that.

How do all these people see her walking her dog but noone hears a .357 going off?

Gunshots aren't that noteworthy. I live in a suburb with almost zero violent crime, and I hear gunshots a few times a year. One of my neighbors sometimes gets the urge to do target practice in his backyard. Sometimes there's one or two gunshots elsewhere, and I have no idea why. Years ago, my own husband once resorted to waiting at our bedroom window on garbage collection eve and shooting a pesky raccoon that made a habit of dining on our garbage.

I'd only pay attention to a gunshot if I heard tires squealing or an argument. With only one gunshot, it's often difficult to be certain it was a gunshot. You sort of pause and think, "Was that a gunshot?" and then you go about your day because you don't hear anything else. I'm sure residents react differently to the sound of a gunshot in dangerous neighborhoods.

 

[SweetT]

Some interesting tidbits here:
http://davidsonnews.net/blog/2014/1...te-battle-rages-over-shooting-victims-estate/

William Drew Becker, Long’s boyfriend at the time of her death and the man who reported her missing in July, filed a will with the court, which Sarah Long signed in May 2014, that names him as sole beneficiary of any assets that don’t already have beneficiaries named. Becker said in a court filing that “unbeknownst to him,” Sarah Long also last spring had made him the beneficiary of other investment accounts and assets she held.

John Long, Sarah Long’s brother, said in a statement to the court supporting Larry Long’s request for a restraining order that his sister had inherited a large sum from their mother. He expressed concern that she had agreed to leave it to Becker, saying, “Sarah was very protective of the money. … She did not spend the money and did not give her husband access to it.” He said he believes it would have been “out of character” to leave the money to Becker.


Another longtime friend said she intended to the money would be used to help support her brother, Rusty, who is physically and mentally challenged.

Becker, who runs a trucking company, argued that Sarah Long was not in distress, although she had lost her job at Lowe’s Cos. a year earlier. He said she had been employed part-time and working on a online master’s degree.

Then this fall, Reeves and Becker suddenly went from adversaries to allies, reaching an agreement to share the estate. With the settlement, which remains confidential, Reeves asked the court to lift a standstill order, and a judge agreed on Nov. 4. Meanwhile, on Dec. 3, Reeves filed a statement with the court acknowledging that the agreement settled his claims on the estate. All of which means the estate now can be settled.

Becker could not be reached for comment and his lawyer told DavidsonNews he was going away for the holiday and was not available.

Bolded above: They were dating more than 8 weeks apparently.

It is always possible that she had other boyfriends.

 

[Miss Muffet]

Great find, Sweet T.

You're right, it does sound like they were in a relationship much longer than originally reported.

John Long, Sarah Long’s brother, said in a statement to the court supporting Larry Long’s request for a restraining order that his sister had inherited a large sum from their mother. He expressed concern that she had agreed to leave it to Becker, saying, “Sarah was very protective of the money. … She did not spend the money and did not give her husband access to it.” He said he believes it would have been “out of character” to leave the money to Becker.

IMO, the bolded validates her not wanting her husband to have the money. Now I have another key to motive to add to my list. Here's an abusive husband whose wife inherited a large sum of money, but she won't allow him access while they live the lifestyle of her working part time at Lowes. I'm guessing they had arguments about her not allowing him to have access to the money---how else would the brother know unless she shared her husband wanted access and she refused? I'm betting it crossed the husband's he'd gain access to the money if she were dead. It sounds to me pretty darn in character for her to try to not leave her husband money.

Another longtime friend said she intended to the money would be used to help support her brother, Rusty, who is physically and mentally challenged.

This longtime friend and we websleuthers can't be sure the will doesn't still leave a portion of the money to Rust or if that was her true intentions to leave him money if she didn't. After all, her naming Becker as "beneficiary of any assets that don’t already have beneficiaries named" means that Rusty could have already been named as beneficiary for assets if she truly intended money to be used to support him.

Our family was advised by a legal expert to not leave money to a relative who requires ongoing care because inheriting a substantial amount of money eliminates qualifying for many services and benefits the relative current receives. In other words, it's like flushing money down the toilet because the money will go towards services and benefits that are currently provided anyway, and when the money is exhausted (which can occur very quickly) the patient qualifies for the previous services and benefits again.

Then this fall, Reeves and Becker suddenly went from adversaries to allies, reaching an agreement to share the estate. With the settlement, which remains confidential, Reeves asked the court to lift a standstill order, and a judge agreed on Nov. 4. Meanwhile, on Dec. 3, Reeves filed a statement with the court acknowledging that the agreement settled his claims on the estate. All of which means the estate now can be settled.

I'm not surprised they settled. The boyfriend would have been foolish to not settle with the husband since he is the only person who had a legal chance of contesting the will, IMO.

 

[SweetT]

Other weird tidbits:
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article9160304.html

On the day Long apparently died, Becker brought her toilet paper and a chocolate milkshake, he told Ingram and Siders. He said she had taken some sleeping pills, and they discussed her cancer diagnosis.

Among items collected from Long’s apartment were Nesquik chocolate drink mix powder, a spoon and a Chapel Hill mug with a plastic straw, the search warrant says.

The affidavit seems to point out similarities with an incident that led Becker’s wife to file a restraining order against him. According to Ingram, Paula Becker said her husband brought her a smoothie in May that tasted funny. “She ... asked if it contained medicine,” Ingram wrote.

She said Becker took the drink from her and flushed it down the toilet, later telling her that he added a sleep aid to the drink to help her rest. She filed a restraining order against him less than a week later, records show.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article9160304.html#storylink=cpy

I think he added the sleeping pill info cause he'd drugged the milk shake. LE should have made sure to check toxicology for this and to check with her dr or in the home for RX bottles of sleeping pills.


TO ME and its JMO the BF had this planned. His wife was practice for knocking someone out if you ask me. Is he divorced yet? Where is his wife? Did they separate? I'm guessing as much.

Last April, Long, a buyer for Lowe’s, began a romantic relationship with Drew Becker, who is married. She separated from her husband, Christopher Reeves, in June.

WOW! THey had not been separated long at all . SO I'm guessing up till that point her husband lived with her. I also see these Allegations of abuse but nothing to substantiate any of it..The PO was dropped that she had originally requested on her hubby. THe rest of the allegations seem to come from her BF that her ex was abusive. How many times do women claim abuse that isn't true? Just saying, its possible.

 

[Miss Muffet]

Is there a date for when Becker's wife filed for a restraining order against him?