2016.05.17 Batch 6 Discovery Docs ***GRAPHIC Content***

[msboo]

I also had a difficult time with reading texts, etc. Agree that lots has not been released---AND with good reason.

 

[FelicityLemon]

I also had a difficult time with reading texts, etc. Agree that lots has not been released---AND with good reason.

*rubbing hands together* boy, are we looking forward (with a little dread and a lot of sorrow mixed in) to seeing those msgs between MS and CWW and maybe even CWW and JRR.

 

[WannaBeSleuth16]

Murder qualifies for double indemnity. Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

i don't think so, but I have been wrong before.

[h=3]What Does Double Indemnity Cover?[/h]Double indemnity provisions usually DON’T cover instances of death involving:

• Suicide
• Murder or conspiracy by any beneficiaries of the policy
• Deaths resulting from the insured party’s own grossly negligent actions
• Deaths from natural causes, including heart disease and cancers

Thus, double indemnity usually only covers wrongful or accidental deaths. These specifications may of course vary depending on the individual’s plan, as well as the laws in each state.
- See more at: http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/double-indemnity-laws.html#sthash.YW0egzlL.dpuf. ��

 

[atthelake]

I am surprised that CWW is seldom mentioned in these documents. MS truly kept their conversations on what phone? Amazon Rain mentioned she knew of three phones, MS and TS each had one (I would presume that is the one where both names show up at top of screen?), and then there was a work phone. So where are the daily conversations with CWW?

Iirc, Jacob, on tricias radio show, stated that his comments and statements would not be released until he went to trial. (iow, CWW statements not released until CWW plea is done in court).

:thinking:

 

[FelicityLemon]

37487 p56
12/15/2013: 15 hours of text msgs MISSING between 2:28am - 5:36:48pm

More than odd considering what went on immediately before that. ('m not sure if I believe it)

 

[U2forever]

Originally Posted by WannaBeSleuth16
But this was not double indemnity. Double indemnity is paid out in the event of an accident and this WAS NOT an accident.
MOO

Murder qualifies for double indemnity.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Thanks Wyle E Coyote, takes note. hoh:
:escape:

If my DH had life insurance on me that included double indemnity for murder, I would be outta here, fast. I could also get LI with Double Indemnity on him.
We would both be side-eying each other. LOL
I read here way to much to feel comfortable with any DI.

 

[FelicityLemon]

We had talked months ago about school loans balance:

Bates 37493 p62
Student Loan
12/28/2013 (Sievers Teresa)
SallyMae account is now under 80,000 it's at $79,023 before Decembers payment

Bates 37497 p66
Are these texts cut and pasted onto this sheet or manually entered (incorrectly?) because they jump from 1/8/2014 to June 30, 2015 on this single page

Also, I see some of the Bates files look fabulous to me! I can read, I can read!

 

[MsJosie]

Thanks Wyle E Coyote, takes note. hoh:
:escape:

If my DH had life insurance on me that included double indemnity for murder, I would be outta here, fast. I could also get LI with Double Indemnity on him.
We would both be side-eying each other. LOL
I read here way to much to feel comfortable with any DI.

Wylie E Coyote....I will go back an search when storm is over, electricity stays on and I can get on Laptop (on ipad now), but Either this thread or the last, a WS member said NO double indemnity for murder, IF the murder was done by a family member...did I misunderstand? Is each insurance policy different? And does that mean that BS may get money off of TS murder? Again, I remember reading a long time ago BS was a beneficiary...policy purchased by MS. Thanks

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

i don't think so, but I have been wrong before.

[h=3]What Does Double Indemnity Cover?[/h]Double indemnity provisions usually DON’T cover instances of death involving:

• Suicide
• Murder or conspiracy by any beneficiaries of the policy
• Deaths resulting from the insured party’s own grossly negligent actions
• Deaths from natural causes, including heart disease and cancers

Thus, double indemnity usually only covers wrongful or accidental deaths. These specifications may of course vary depending on the individual’s plan, as well as the laws in each state.
- See more at: http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/double-indemnity-laws.html#sthash.YW0egzlL.dpuf. ��

From your quote, Murder ... by beneficiaries does not qualify. Murder by 3rd parties (not beneficiaries) generally qualifies. Murder does = wrongful death.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

Wylie E Coyote....I will go back an search when storm is over, electricity stays on and I can get on Laptop (on ipad now), but Either this thread or the last, a WS member said NO double indemnity for murder, IF the murder was done by a family member...did I misunderstand? Is each insurance policy different? And does that mean that BS may get money off of TS murder? Again, I remember reading a long time ago BS was a beneficiary...policy purchased by MS. Thanks

Generally, yes, murder = double indemnity if committed by someone other than the beneficiaries. Yes, each policy can be different and some do not include double indemnity provisions. And iirc BS is/was a beneficiary on MS's policy on his own life.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[FelicityLemon]

From your quote, Murder ... by beneficiaries does not qualify. Murder by 3rd parties (not beneficiaries) generally qualifies. Murder does = wrongful death.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Yeah, when MS is convicted of murder he won't get double (or even single). But, would the girls or whomever is listed as secondary get double? Or does it simply mean that no beneficiaries benefit from double because the primary was the murderer?

 

[SaucyGal]

Whoa! I wonder if BS is still a beneficiary? I'm sure those payments weren't kept up. Thinking of it now, I could see benefits going to BS in the event both MS and TS died. Maybe in his will he indicated BS to become guardian and that would be a way to get money "right away" to provide for the girls..? Then say TS had a policy that kept a trust for them later.

All of that is supposition, but it's brings up other "rabbit holes" of thought. Like if the BS policy was kept up, maybe MS should be the one watching his back. In a case with so many bizarre twists one never knows! Okay, going back to my corner now. 😂

Sent from my Lenovo TAB 2 A8-50F using Tapatalk

 

[SurfieTX]

Bates 37217

Mark mentions another email address. I don't think I have seen this one mentioned yet.

[email protected]

 

[FelicityLemon]

Whoa, just discovered that when I read the docs on the Google platform, it's SO much clearer than when I download to my puter and open in Acrobat Pro for organizing.

GRRRRRRRRR!

 

[WannaBeSleuth16]

Yeah, when MS is convicted of murder he won't get double (or even single). But, would the girls or whomever is listed as secondary get double? Or does it simply mean that no beneficiaries benefit from double because the primary was the murderer?

MS, if convicted, will get zero. Zilch. The secondary beneficiary(ies) will get the double indemnity, UNLESS the secondary is also involved in the crime. (Example: BS listed as secondary and is also convicted.) Then she'd not get anything either. But the innocents will get double? Hope this clears up my line of thinking
MOO

 

[IQuestion]

Bates 37217

Mark mentions another email address. I don't think I have seen this one mentioned yet.

[email protected]

SURFIETX....Thank you...that e-mail address [email protected] was also associated with his website NAPLESPAINFREE.COM... and their registration just expired 11 days ago:
NOTICE: This domain name expired on 5/12/2016 and is pending renewal or deletion.
Welcome to: naplespainfree.com
This Web page is parked for FREE, courtesy of GoDaddy.com.

 

[Greater Than]

Previously it helped a lot by people sharing screenshots with links attached.

Are we allowed to do that now? There were a lot of screenshots on during the hearing so I was thinking it might be ok still.

I find screenshots very helpful.

ETA.. I'm referring to screen shots of the documents that were released not anything else

No. Not of these docs. Far too salacious and I refuse to make any of it visible on this board. Especially those salacious parts (which are many). Also, too many innocent names are visible via the texts, calendar entries.

The docs stored on our Google drive is almost more than I can stomach.

:bump:

Just a reminder... beach has asked that we not post screen shots of any of the docs in this batch.

Thank you!

 

[MsJosie]

I cannot think of an approprite word, except great....It would be great if any 'others', MS had an affair or trist with, kept his texts and their replies....if the prosecution needed to use the texts in the trial....MS wanted his freedom to do what he wanted, monies to spend how he wanted and this was one way to prove this...but MS never should have murderd not the expense of TS beautiful life, the girls lives, and all the people TS helped. From what we have read so far, What is yet to come must be unbelievable.

Does anyone know when CWW goes to trial? Thanks.

 

[FelicityLemon]

I'm sorry, I did forget. I had blanked out the names and phone numbers, so at least I didn't out anyone (other than MS)

So sorry! *I get so excited to find things* :blushing:

 

[FelicityLemon]

Bates 37991: Homeschooling
8/6/2013 1:39:24 PM, [email protected] (Mark & Teresa Sievers)
it gets better... we r going to start home schooling now


Bates 37807: Beginning to set-up another one...

MS: ahhh.„thanks.they love it too. Maybe we can get the girls together for a playdate sometime this summer

Target: Yes! We can do that!!!

MS: Hey baby, I just spoke to Peter earlier today and he's going to be available to tape your seminar series. Pretty cool momma.

MS: Sorry, I meant to send this to Teresa...

It greatly disturbs me that he had sex with someone they helped out with money. Not that adults aren't responsible for their own behavior, but I wonder how much pressure or manipulation was used on that person in need, not this person above.