Sheri Coleman, sons Garett and Gavin murdered 5-5-09, Columbia, IL. Pt6

[Melly53]

Maybe the POA option did not run through their minds and maybe they just thought it would simpler doing it this way.

They refinanced because they needed the extra money for her missionary work? and they figured let try to sell the house. Maybe the refinance people said just do a quit claim deed while you are here and things will be taken care of if the house sells while you are gone.

(Taking your name off the deed or not having your name on the deed in IL means nothing. You are not signing away your rights to the property in the event of a divorce if that property was purchased during the marriage)

Maybe they just forgot to put her name back on the deed or maybe she wasn't worried about because she knew what IL laws were about property gained during the marriage.

Maybe they were going to put the house back on the market this summer when she would have been on her missionary trips she had planned for this summer.

Refinancing a house with equity taken out prior to selling the house does not make good financial sense. I have always been told that unless you plan on holding the house for 3 to 5 years after a refinance then you should not do it because you lose too much money. Sorry but the quitclaim deed makes absolutely no sense to me in this situation.

 

[OrdinaryLife]

That is not always true. In Illinois if property is acquired during the marriage and then someone is deeded off during the marriage it can hold up in court assuming it wasn't a temporary situation.


But,on another note if they were holding the property with right of survivorship he would have no reason to deed her off if he was going to murder her.Only if he were going to divorce her would this make any sense at all.

JBean, you have to request a quit claim document, don't you? I mean, it's not like a mortgage company shows up with one "just in case". When ex chose to refinance in his name only, I called the lender and asked why I was not part of the deal (after asking ex and not getting straight answer) and he told me the house is still part of mine unless I signed the quit claim and it was notarized. I would have to have knowledge and documentation sealed that I "gave up" my rights to home. Am I missing something??? Or, perhaps my normally confused self???

 

[panthera]

Nancy Grace is back to Sheri's case. More words found in the house.

Going upstairs: "wh*re punished or "U are punished"

Kitchen: "I saw you leave, *advertiser censored** you, I am always watching"

Family was inside house today and reported messages.

She's also talking with lawyer, Jack Carey, about the wrongful death lawsuit.

 

[chestergal]

Refinancing a house with equity taken out prior to selling the house does not make good financial sense. I have always been told that unless you plan on holding the house for 3 to 5 years after a refinance then you should not do it because you lose too much money. Sorry but the quitclaim deed makes absolutely no sense to me in this situation.

Good advise or not. They were trying to sell the home recently. This was noted in reports on 4/5 or 4/6.

 

[DogWood]

Lawyers say Sheri Coleman would not have removed her name from deed

http://www.bnd.com/breaking_news/story/783711.html

Mr. Carey is on NG.

 

[rockman]

Refinancing a house with equity taken out prior to selling the house does not make good financial sense. I have always been told that unless you plan on holding the house for 3 to 5 years after a refinance then you should not do it because you lose too much money. Sorry but the quitclaim deed makes absolutely no sense to me in this situation.

Agree. The payback on the refinance - depending on rate - generally takes about 3 years.

 

[OrdinaryLife]

You are right - I don't see a single notary stamp. The recorder doesn't need them, but I'd imagine the lender sure would.

Curiouser and curiouser.

I was told that for myself, as well as for lender, it would be a legal protection of my rights as well as for lender.

These documents look like those copies you are given when refinancing. There are no other signatures of the person who dealt with the refinancing. No Notary. No witness. Nothing.

 

[rockman]

I believe we may learn more about the scrub pants on 6/10 at the preliminary hearing.

So will all prosecution evidence be made public at that time - or selectively? In other words, can LE or PA still hold back some evidence from the public? I would think so otherwise any possible jury pool would be tainted.

 

[JBean]

JBean, you have to request a quit claim document, don't you? I mean, it's not like a mortgage company shows up with one "just in case". When ex chose to refinance in his name only, I called the lender and asked why I was not part of the deal (after asking ex and not getting straight answer) and he told me the house is still part of mine unless I signed the quit claim and it was notarized. I would have to have knowledge and documentation sealed that I "gave up" my rights to home. Am I missing something??? Or, perhaps my normally confused self???

You are in the driver's seat. You have the asset but not the liability..beautiful
But you had to have signed something somewhere somehow acknowledging that there is a change in mortgage yes?

The lender would not bring a quitclaim for any reason and no one can agree to it except you if you are giving up your interest in a house. You should still have an interest in that home.

 

[CatMama3]

How would the civil suit help the criminal case at this early stage? Or does this give Sheri's family some type of financial assistance or protection against Coleman and his lawyers or family?

Is there an attorney in the house?

 

[JBean]

You are right - I don't see a single notary stamp. The recorder doesn't need them, but I'd imagine the lender sure would.

Curiouser and curiouser.

Is there a second page jurat missing? I'll go look and see. Still maks no sense.

 

[chestergal]

That is not always true. In Illinois if property is acquired during the marriage and then someone is deeded off during the marriage it can hold up in court assuming it wasn't a temporary situation.


But,on another note if they were holding the property with right of survivorship he would have no reason to deed her off if he was going to murder her.Only if he were going to divorce her would this make any sense at all.

PROPERTY DISTRIBUTION:
Illinois is an equitable distribution state, meaning that marital property shall be divided equitably, not necessarily equally. For purposes of distribution of property, all property acquired by either spouse after the marriage and before a judgment of dissolution of marriage is presumed to be marital property, regardless of whether title is held individually or by the spouses in some form of co-ownership such as joint tenancy, tenancy in common, tenancy by the entirety, or community property. Marital property shall be divided, without regard to marital misconduct, considering all relevant factors, including:

The contribution of each party to the acquisition, preservation, or increase or decrease in value of the marital or non-marital property, including the contribution of a spouse as a homemaker or to the family unit.
The dissipation by each party of the marital or non-marital property.
The value of the property assigned to each spouse.
The duration of the marriage.
The relevant economic circumstances of each spouse when the division of property is to become effective, including the desirability of awarding the family home, or the right to live therein for reasonable periods, to the spouse having custody of the children.
Any obligations and rights arising from a prior marriage of either party.
Any post-nuptial agreement of the parties.
The age, health, station, occupation, amount and sources of income, vocational skills, employability, estate, liabilities, and needs of each of the parties.
The custodial provisions for any children.
Whether the apportionment is in lieu of or in addition to maintenance.
The reasonable opportunity of each spouse for future acquisition of capital assets and income.
The tax consequences of the property division upon the respective economic circumstances of the parties.

Non-marital property is considered:

Property acquired by gift, legacy or descent.
Property acquired in exchange for property acquired before the marriage or in exchange for property acquired by gift, legacy or descent.
Property acquired by a spouse after a judgment of legal separation.
Property excluded by valid agreement of the parties.
Any judgment or property obtained by judgment awarded to a spouse from the other spouse.
Property acquired before the marriage.


you might be right - see red above


http://divorcesupport.about.com/od/usstatedivorcelaws/a/illinois_laws.htm

 

[OrdinaryLife]

How would the civil suit help the criminal case at this early stage? Or does this give Sheri's family some type of financial assistance or protection against Coleman and his lawyers or family?

Is there an attorney in the house?

If I'm not mistaken, this is simply so CC, et al, cannot "profit". It is a protection of distributing assets at/for the benefit of CC. It kills me that these victims of murder family has to go to these lengths.

 

[OrdinaryLife]

Is there a second page jurat missing? I'll go look and see. Still maks no sense.

Yes. It states page 1 of 2. Only one page is shown that was posted at link.

 

[JBean]

PROPERTY DISTRIBUTION:
Illinois is an equitable distribution state, meaning that marital property shall be divided equitably, not necessarily equally. For purposes of distribution of property, all property acquired by either spouse after the marriage and before a judgment of dissolution of marriage is presumed to be marital property, regardless of whether title is held individually or by the spouses in some form of co-ownership such as joint tenancy, tenancy in common, tenancy by the entirety, or community property. Marital property shall be divided, without regard to marital misconduct, considering all relevant factors, including:

The contribution of each party to the acquisition, preservation, or increase or decrease in value of the marital or non-marital property, including the contribution of a spouse as a homemaker or to the family unit.
The dissipation by each party of the marital or non-marital property.
The value of the property assigned to each spouse.
The duration of the marriage.
The relevant economic circumstances of each spouse when the division of property is to become effective, including the desirability of awarding the family home, or the right to live therein for reasonable periods, to the spouse having custody of the children.
Any obligations and rights arising from a prior marriage of either party.
Any post-nuptial agreement of the parties.
The age, health, station, occupation, amount and sources of income, vocational skills, employability, estate, liabilities, and needs of each of the parties.
The custodial provisions for any children.
Whether the apportionment is in lieu of or in addition to maintenance.
The reasonable opportunity of each spouse for future acquisition of capital assets and income.
The tax consequences of the property division upon the respective economic circumstances of the parties.

Non-marital property is considered:

Property acquired by gift, legacy or descent.
Property acquired in exchange for property acquired before the marriage or in exchange for property acquired by gift, legacy or descent.
Property acquired by a spouse after a judgment of legal separation.
Property excluded by valid agreement of the parties.
Any judgment or property obtained by judgment awarded to a spouse from the other spouse.
Property acquired before the marriage.


you might be right - see red above

I got it straight from the attorney. he said it can depend on several factors, but if it was intentionally quitclaimed and the prop was acquired during the marriage and quitclaimed during the marriage it could hold up.

But again, if the plan was to murder her, he would just get her half of the property(if he got away with the murder) so there is NO reason to do this.



Maybe she got the 28k and was going to move on. maybe they struck a deal that she got the money and he got the house.

 

[JBean]

Yes. It states page 1 of 2. Only one page is shown that was posted at link.

Then I would ASSume that the 2nd pages of jurats are not linked.

 

[analytical]

OT: Mike Tyson's 4-year old daughter died tragically today as a result of accidental strangulation - her head or neck caught in a cord hanging from treadmill in the home. Found by her 7-year old brother.

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/30932524/

 

[JBean]

I have an account that lets me pull up copies of recorded documents for Washoe County, NV. at my desk. I pulled up a bunch of deeds and could not find a Quit Claim that was not notarized.

All quitclaims have to be notarized no doubt about it.


So what under what conditions would one give up an asset and keep the liability?
1. bankruptcy
2. applying for some sort of assistance
3. under duress


anything else?

 

[SuziQ]

A trick from my finance days.

To compare the sigs, turn them upside down. That way you are comparing shapes and not reading the name. IMO, The quitclaim and the new mortgage are different than the original mortgage. But it could also be a change in handwriting over several years.

 

[Melly53]

All quitclaims have to be notarized no doubt about it.


So what under what conditions would one give up an asset and keep the liability?
1. bankruptcy
2. applying for some sort of assistance
3. under duress


anything else?

Forgery