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

[panthera]

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/

Larry King is talking about it now. :cry:

 

[JBean]

Larry King is talking about it now. :cry:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84541"]Mike Tyson's 4 yo Daughter Found Hanging From Cord - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

 

[SuziQ]

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.

Could be he was planning on divorce and trying to follow in his brother's footsteps.

 

[OrdinaryLife]

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?

Manipulation of another.
Personal gain...in ones own mind.

For the sake of discussion... Is it possible CC could have (since we don't know at this point) planned and manipulated SC because he did not want her family to be part of her estate if she died? Material control, etc. He deserved, yada, yada, yada....

 

[SuziQ]

Heck, maybe SC didn't know about the refinance.

 

[JBean]

Could be he was planning on divorce and trying to follow in his brother's footsteps.

yes indeedy. It would at least make sense as to why he/she agreed to take her off the deed IF she actually did do it.

It just occurred to me that here in CA, a signature on a quitclaim does not necessarily have to be notarized to be upheld in certain instances.

Does anyone know if she was being sued for any reason or was she anticipating a lawsuit? That is another reason one would remove their name from title.

 

[rollinon86]

This is the only thing I can think of... (the reason she would do the quit claim)

She was doing missionary work outside the country and we know that at one point they were trying to sell the home.

Maybe she did it because she knew she would be out of the country doing missionary work and if she signed the home over to Chris and if the house sold while she was gone they would not need her sig on the paperwork.

This is the only reason I can think of why she did this and also this might explain the extra $28K refinance. So that she would have that money to live on while she was doing her missionary work.


Early on wasn't their reports that the house had recently been put up for sale and then taken off the market because it did not sell?

When did Sheri last go out of town or the country to do missionary work?

Does anyone know precisely WHEN the house was actually on the market?? Was it after the refinance and quitclaim or was it on the market before? Maybe Artie or someone would know??

She was going on a mission in July of this year to Mexico and was going to take the boys this time from what I understood. Has the house been on the market recently and since this refi/quitclaim that would tell us if this scenario would be possible?

I don't recall seeing a for sale sign or real estate sign when I went past there last week. Course...LOL...could just be I didn't catch it too.

 

[JBean]

I'm racking my pea-sized brain...

Bankruptcy (i.e. if SC declared alone) - wouldn't matter. The lender has a perfected secured interest and would be entitled to recover via sale of the collateral even if SC had quitclaimed her interest. If there was equity the transaction could be unwound by the Bankruptcy judge if he determined it was to the detriment of other creditors and was done close to filing.

Assistance - don't know. I do know in some cases giving assets to family and then claiming you have no assets is pretty transparent.

Duress - yep, I can see that.

Also, as mentioned, perhaps she signed it not knowing what it was, just another place for a signature.

I agree down the line, but I am just trying to think of reasons that make any sense at all. However, with the BK if CC agreed to pay the mortgage and keep it current, the lender may not get involved at all. if there is no equity the trustee isn't going to want it anyway. But in that case there is no reason to remove her name, unless it just muddies the water.ETA: I totally agree with you I am just trying to make any sense of this.

I think there are plenty of ways to do it dishonestly and sticking it in with the refi paperwork is really quite clever. but I amtrying to think of legit reasons to do this intentionally.

 

[OrdinaryLife]

I have to agree with one thing mentioned. Perhaps SC signed papers and the quit claim was one she really didn't realize what she was signing. If it was in the "stack", she may have just signed without realizing what she was doing. Now, any person who put together the papers would/should have had to explain to her what she was signing.

I still have a problem with these links that show no other signatures other than CC and SC. I have a strong hinky about them. As well as the three blown up SC sigs that blew up for comparision. Especially the quit claim. But, I'm just an armchair wannabe.

 

[rollinon86]

Heck, maybe SC didn't know about the refinance.

That could be a REAL possibility....this is not a local lender and documents may have been faxed or emailed, etc. without her knowledge. Someone could have forged the signatures. The lender would have been none the wiser!

 

[JBean]

I have to agree with one thing mentioned. Perhaps SC signed papers and the quit claim was one she really didn't realize what she was signing. If it was in the "stack", she may have just signed without realizing what she was doing. Now, any person who put together the papers would/should have had to explain to her what she was signing.

I still have a problem with these links that show no other signatures other than CC and SC. I have a strong hinky about them. As well as the three blown up SC sigs that blew up for comparision. Especially the quit claim. But, I'm just an armchair wannabe.

But that would be so easy to contest in a divorce and no reason to do it for death, so i don't get it.
Those pages are incomplete. One of those is just the PUD rider signature.

 

[DogWood]

Does anyone know precisely WHEN the house was actually on the market?? Was it after the refinance and quitclaim or was it on the market before? Maybe Artie or someone would know??

She was going on a mission in July of this year to Mexico and was going to take the boys this time from what I understood. Has the house been on the market recently and since this refi/quitclaim that would tell us if this scenario would be possible?

I don't recall seeing a for sale sign or real estate sign when I went past there last week. Course...LOL...could just be I didn't catch it too.

Calling any RE agent in IL to look up all expired/canceled listings for that addy on MLS.

 

[JBean]

After seeing the documents, and ASSuming they are all legit, the net effect it to make SC a guarantor of the mortgage rather than a true co-borrower on the owned asset.

As you have shown, in any sort of property distribution the actual titling is not necessarily binding. But what we also saw is that until the point the judge got involved and gave SC's family access, CC's family WAS able to assert that SC's family had no right to go in there - and CC's family was keeping SC's family out until the judge told them to knock it off.

So perhaps it was a sort of "ambush" maneuver - whereby CC could take some sort of precipitous action such as, say, kicking her out, filing for divorce, murder her, etc. and he would have a period of time where he would have exclusive control and access to the house, legally enforceable, until such time as SC/her family could figure out what was going on and get in front of a judge.

In the mean time, CC would have the full legal right to do whatever he wanted - throw things out, clean things up, etc. without worry.

But they weren't holding the property as tenants in common,so holding it as comm prop w/right of survivorship would accomplish the same thing.

 

[OrdinaryLife]

That could be a REAL possibility....this is not a local lender and documents may have been faxed or emailed, etc. without her knowledge. Someone could have forged the signatures. The lender would have been none the wiser!

This could be a possibility. In my experience , I had no idea what the terms were or that I was not part of the refi until FedEx mailed documents to home. It wasn't until I called ex and began reading document that I learned what he had decided to do. I will be honest here. If I had waited until ex came home, let him open envelope, read it and then tell me, I would have just ~gone with the flow~ and never had thought twice about it. There is much to be said about trust and how comfortable you can get in it. I wonder if, perhaps, SC had so much trust she never thought twice about anythng CC did or told her.....

 

[DogWood]

But that would be so easy to contest in a divorce and no reason to do it for death, so i don't get it.
Those pages are incomplete. One of those is just the PUD rider signature.

I wish one news site would post all the docs provided to them today - along with all the pages in the docs with regard to the mortgage, re-fi, and QCD. They are a matter of public record. They have access to them locally and do it in other cases. Sigh.

 

[OrdinaryLife]

But that would be so easy to contest in a divorce and no reason to do it for death, so i don't get it.
Those pages are incomplete. One of those is just the PUD rider signature.

I know, but if CC was arrogant enough working with bad/inaccurate information (especially since his brother did less than admirable thing to his ex), he may have truly thought he had to protect his "assets" to death. Sadly, we are not talking a healthy, normal man who knew he needed to make a change for himself and his family. We are dealing with a person with a whacked sense of entitlement and a mind that rationalized the reasons why.

 

[JBean]

I wish one news site would post all the docs provided to them today - along with all the pages in the docs with regard to the mortgage, re-fi, and QCD. They are a matter of public record. They have access to them locally and do it in other cases. Sigh.

Typically I have access to all recorded docs like that. but Monroe County is not very sophisticated as far as online docs. i can see activity but it won't let me download the docs.

 

[OrdinaryLife]

After seeing the documents, and ASSuming they are all legit, the net effect it to make SC a guarantor of the mortgage rather than a true co-borrower on the owned asset.

As you have shown, in any sort of property distribution the actual titling is not necessarily binding. But what we also saw is that until the point the judge got involved and gave SC's family access, CC's family WAS able to assert that SC's family had no right to go in there - and CC's family was keeping SC's family out until the judge told them to knock it off.

So perhaps it was a sort of "ambush" maneuver - whereby CC could take some sort of precipitous action such as, say, kicking her out, filing for divorce, murder her, etc. and he would have a period of time where he would have exclusive control and access to the house, legally enforceable, until such time as SC/her family could figure out what was going on and get in front of a judge.

In the mean time, CC would have the full legal right to do whatever he wanted - throw things out, clean things up, etc. without worry.

This "ambush" thought works for me. Entitlement and control of *his* wants. This thought really works for me...

 

[WestSideGal]

Documents with Synergy Title Services (home office in Chicago) with an office conveniently located in Tampa!

http://www.synergytitleservices.com/locations.htm

 

[DogWood]

Typically I have access to all recorded docs like that. but Monroe County is not very sophisticated as far as online docs. i can see activity but it won't let me download the docs.

I know. I did check to make sure that the doc recorded on the site that shows 11-01-08 was the same Doc# we saw on the QCD, and it was.

Interesting it was stamped as recorded on 11-20-08 on what we saw but on the site is says 11-01-08? Maybe anything on there defers back to the 1st of a calendar month when shown on-line?