CA CA - Barbara Thomas, 69, from Bullhead City AZ, disappeared in Mojave desert, 12 July 2019 #11

[anneg]

The money I inherited that I didn't put in the joint account with my husband (as noted in earlier post) is set up as a transfer on death account. This arrangement avoids probate. Of course a death certificate will be required for the money to be released to the beneficiaries.

 

[10ofRods]

I've checked the court documents search in San Bernardino County to see if any search warrants, but I'm not sure my document search ability is the best (the only case number I have is the one originally assigned to the case when the 911 call came in). Since apparently there are no charges filed, there's no case, and a search warrant would (I think) be connected to the incident number. If anyone knows more about this, please let me know (I'll ask @Gitana next week if she can help me).

I seriously doubt that SBCSO LEO's are driving into Arizona to drive by RT's house. Depending on what they've shared with Mojave County LE (in Arizona), perhaps some of them have taken an interest. Very hard to say.

I keep waiting to hear of search warrants, though. We're getting close to 3 months out. I assume that LE doesn't need to have their hands on actual phones to get phone records. Hopefully, they've gotten the cell tower records in order to bolster LE's claim that there's no evidence of abduction. However, I think they'd need search warrants to actually look at who, of the people passing through the area, might have stopped near Kelbaker Road. Not sure a judge would allow such a blanket request.

With no suspects and no evidence of criminality, it's possible that search warrants are pretty hard to come by.

Do you all think that if LE was watching RT (I don't think they are, but maybe?) that simply seeing him resume his ordinary life and, perhaps, continue to spend money on things he likes to do...would be enough to get a search warrant? I don't think so. But many of you have seen many more cases go down, blow by blow, in recent years.

What kinds of things could watching RT (or anyone else in this case for that matter) reveal that would push the case forward? What would suspicious behavior look like, three months out? I can't think of anything really. Sometimes people rush into new relationships when their spouse dies, is it the fact that it's a disappearance that would make this more suspicious? Would a judge agree?

I just can't see why LE would be "keeping tabs" on the day to day doings of the spouse of a missing person. If he goes and gambles, that's his business, etc. At what point would a judge say it's suspicious and what would a search warrant be for, if the phone records are already on hand? If the phone records showed that someone was lying, sure, but if not...then it seems really intrusive on RT to have anyone driving past his house simply to see what he's up to.

What do you guys think?

 

[Cherwell]

I feel uneasy mentioning Barbara's financial affairs as it's a private matter, but I would be very surprised if, having inherited a considerable sum of money, she wouldn't have arranged for some of it to be held in trust for her grandchildren at least.

 

[deugirtni]

If the person inheriting desires, they can keep their inheritance separate from their spouse in both Arizona and California.

However, it's entirely up to the person who inherits. Once they get the money, they can do whatever they want with it. Most people I know choose to put the funds into joint accounts with their spouse (which means that no further will is required and when one spouse dies, the other still has access to the money). I have seen people choose to do otherwise when I worked in law firms, and it was people who inherited amounts of money and property similar to Barbara's and who wanted to leave varying amounts to various people, so trusts were set up.

I definitely want my spouse and kids to have immediate access to my inheritance if something happens to me, it was easy to accomplish with the cash simply by adding my husband to the account. If Barbara trusted RT (and I believe she did), she very likely did what most of us do. She simply put the money into their joint accounts. Someone suggested the possibility that RT might even have been the money manager (I bet he was).

The money I inherited that I didn't put in the joint account with my husband (as noted in earlier post) is set up as a transfer on death account. This arrangement avoids probate. Of course a death certificate will be required for the money to be released to the beneficiaries.

My question was more wondering about - if a person inherits money, and then the person's marriage breaks up afterward, is that inheritance money subject to splitting 50/50 with spouse? I'm not sure on your laws there, whether you even *have* to split 50/50, nor if inheritances are included in any such amounts.

 

[al66pine]

Trust Estab'ed for BT's Fam/G'chilren/Charity/or? ? And/or PreNup?

.... I would be very surprised if, having inherited a considerable sum of money, she wouldn't have arranged for some of it to be held in trust for her grandchildren at least.

. @Cherwell sbm Thanks for your post.
Agreeing it's possible, before or after marriage to RT, BT estab'ed a trust w children, G'children, relatives, and/or charities, or unknown-to-us- persons as beneficiaries. May or may not include RT as benef'y.
Or possible that BT's Mother had estab'ed a trust (possibly years before her death) and the 'millions' @dbdb11 referred to constitute the principal of that trust? If so, possible BT has been receiving only the income from the trust and may/may not be able to invade/encroach principal, which is/may/will be passed to next generation. Or a charity. Or?
If so & if ^ is known to certain ppl, may or may not be motive for being involved in her disappearance.

Also isn't it possible, even likely that they have a pre-nuptial agreement, considering ---
----- Ages when married ~ 55 and 58 y/o (69 & 72 y/o couple now married for ~ 14 yrs).
----- Each of them previously married one or more times.
----- Each w adult children from previous relationships.

If so (hypothetical) PreNup may provide re property division in event of (hypo) divorce and in event of (hypo) her pre-deceasing him. Could be different outcomes from those two events.
jmo

 

[Kapua]

I've checked the court documents search in San Bernardino County to see if any search warrants, but I'm not sure my document search ability is the best (the only case number I have is the one originally assigned to the case when the 911 call came in). Since apparently there are no charges filed, there's no case, and a search warrant would (I think) be connected to the incident number. If anyone knows more about this, please let me know (I'll ask @Gitana next week if she can help me).

I seriously doubt that SBCSO LEO's are driving into Arizona to drive by RT's house. Depending on what they've shared with Mojave County LE (in Arizona), perhaps some of them have taken an interest. Very hard to say.

I keep waiting to hear of search warrants, though. We're getting close to 3 months out. I assume that LE doesn't need to have their hands on actual phones to get phone records. Hopefully, they've gotten the cell tower records in order to bolster LE's claim that there's no evidence of abduction. However, I think they'd need search warrants to actually look at who, of the people passing through the area, might have stopped near Kelbaker Road. Not sure a judge would allow such a blanket request.

With no suspects and no evidence of criminality, it's possible that search warrants are pretty hard to come by.

Do you all think that if LE was watching RT (I don't think they are, but maybe?) that simply seeing him resume his ordinary life and, perhaps, continue to spend money on things he likes to do...would be enough to get a search warrant? I don't think so. But many of you have seen many more cases go down, blow by blow, in recent years.

What kinds of things could watching RT (or anyone else in this case for that matter) reveal that would push the case forward? What would suspicious behavior look like, three months out? I can't think of anything really. Sometimes people rush into new relationships when their spouse dies, is it the fact that it's a disappearance that would make this more suspicious? Would a judge agree?

I just can't see why LE would be "keeping tabs" on the day to day doings of the spouse of a missing person. If he goes and gambles, that's his business, etc. At what point would a judge say it's suspicious and what would a search warrant be for, if the phone records are already on hand? If the phone records showed that someone was lying, sure, but if not...then it seems really intrusive on RT to have anyone driving past his house simply to see what he's up to.

What do you guys think?

I'm not sure how the process of getting and serving search warrants works when the stuff LE needs to search is in a different state. Does LE work with authorities in the jurisdiction in which the person resides? They must have a way of working this out.

In terms of surveillance, I assume LE wants to know if RT changes residences so that they can contact him if BT is found. But they certainly don't need to keep track of his daily movements. MOO

 

[al66pine]

When couple divorces and one received inheritance during marriage?

My question was more wondering about - if a person inherits money, and then the person's marriage breaks up afterward, is that inheritance money subject to splitting 50/50 with spouse? I'm not sure on your laws there, whether you even *have* to split 50/50, nor if inheritances are included in any such amounts.

. @deugirntni Good question. Depends on the state law.
AZ statute re divorce defines as community property:
"All property acquired by either husband or wife during the marriage is the community property of the husband and wife except for property that is: 1. Acquired by gift, devise or descent..."
Value of all the couple's community property is totaled, then split 50/50 to each.
Excludes value of any property/assets inherited, and excludes value of property/assets each had at the time marriage occurred.
{{ETA: Could have different result w a PreNup}}}
jmo
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 25, Chapter 2, Article 2, Section 25-211, et seq. (Property Rights and Contract Powers).
Also Arizona Marital Property Laws - FindLaw
Exception 2 is After service of a petition for divorce, legal separation or annulment (as long as the petition results in a decree).

 

[deugirtni]

Thank you. So next question:
Scenario:
Say wife inherits large sum of money.. not subject to family law division in a divorce..
Couple/wife purchases an expensive RV/truck with some of the money..
The couple separates/divorces..
As I understand it (where I live, I have been told this by a lawyer), while it can get muddy, if a papertrail exists to prove that the items were purchased using the inheritance monies, then that item/value would not be subject to inclusion in the division of marital assets.
Would it be the same there?
ie this is a big IF out of nowhere.. but say wife was privately (only known by husband) very much considering leaving the marriage, say during perhaps a trip overseas she may decide not to return, potentially all of any inheritance monies, plus any expensive purchases already made with the inheritance monies, would belong to wife and would not have to be considered during the division of assets. Therefore, potentially, husband would be SOL for having access/ownership to any of the remaining funds, nor of the items purchased. He could end up with no RV/truck and none of that money.
Food for thinking.. ??

 

[katydid23]

My question was more wondering about - if a person inherits money, and then the person's marriage breaks up afterward, is that inheritance money subject to splitting 50/50 with spouse? I'm not sure on your laws there, whether you even *have* to split 50/50, nor if inheritances are included in any such amounts.

Here is the legal advice, given to me by my brother, an attorney, when he gave me the check from my father's estate/will.

He told me that it was not community property, and I could spend it any way I wanted, or give it to whomever I wanted, or save it for myself for the future.

HOWEVER , he also said that if I put it in our joint savings account, then my husband could spend it any way he desired. And if he wanted to, he could clean out 'our' savings account, and walk away, and it would be a tough legal battle for me to get it returned at that point.

Even in a divorce he said, if the money was in a joint bank account, it would be very hard for me to demand all of it for myself at that point--no matter where it came from.

[I did put it in our joint account because we had been married for 30 years already so I trusted him completely. ]

 

[katydid23]

Thank you. So next question:
Scenario:
Say wife inherits large sum of money.. not subject to family law division in a divorce..
Couple/wife purchases an expensive RV/truck with some of the money..
The couple separates/divorces..
As I understand it (where I live, I have been told this by a lawyer), while it can get muddy, if a papertrail exists to prove that the items were purchased using the inheritance monies, then that item/value would not be subject to inclusion in the division of marital assets.
Would it be the same there?
ie this is a big IF out of nowhere.. but say wife was privately (only known by husband) very much considering leaving the marriage, say during perhaps a trip overseas she may decide not to return, potentially all of any inheritance monies, plus any expensive purchases already made with the inheritance monies, would belong to wife and would not have to be considered during the division of assets. Therefore, potentially, husband would be SOL for having access/ownership to any of the remaining funds, nor of the items purchased. He could end up with no RV/truck and none of that money.
Food for thinking.. ??

It's a possible motive for sure.

However it would be tough for BT, and an expensive legal battle, to get all of that money back, if in fact she bought those items with him.

Is other RV in his name or hers? How about the truck? If it's in his name, and her money was used, it would still be hard to take it from him, if there money had been in a joint account.

I don't know if it's true, my brother is a defense attorney, not a divorce lawyer, but he told me that if I put my inheritance in a money market fund, attached to our joint savings account, that I was then giving my husband permission to use any monies from that account, as his name is on it too. JMO

 

[deugirtni]

It's a possible motive for sure.

However it would be tough for BT, and an expensive legal battle, to get all of that money back, if in fact she bought those items with him.

Is other RV in his name or hers? How about the truck? If it's in his name, and her money was used, it would still be hard to take it from him, if there money had been in a joint account.

I don't know if it's true, my brother is a defense attorney, not a divorce lawyer, but he told me that if I put my inheritance in a money market fund, attached to our joint savings account, that I was then giving my husband permission to use any monies from that account, as his name is on it too. JMO

Yes, I completely understand that part.. if you put it in a joint account somewhere, then he can do whatevr h wants with it, even take it all and gamble it all away in one night.. but in the event of separation, she would have that same ability (assuming the funds were still accessible to the wife, in that joint account) - she could take that money back out and put it into a personal account with only her name on it... and then.. not sure how the RV/truck would work, I am wondering if its value couldn't be deducted from his share of half of the equity in the house or something.. just trying to say that for the husband in such a scenario, he MAY have even more to lose than just his hands on the inheritance monies of his wife's.

But you're right, if he protested, it would be wasted in legal fees just fighting for it. imo.

 

[deugirtni]

Was it said how long ago this inheritance was received? (ie wondering if perhaps it could have been used also for the marital home?)

 

[LietKynes]

Thank you. So next question:
Scenario:
Say wife inherits large sum of money.. not subject to family law division in a divorce..
Couple/wife purchases an expensive RV/truck with some of the money..
The couple separates/divorces..
As I understand it (where I live, I have been told this by a lawyer), while it can get muddy, if a papertrail exists to prove that the items were purchased using the inheritance monies, then that item/value would not be subject to inclusion in the division of marital assets.
Would it be the same there?
ie this is a big IF out of nowhere.. but say wife was privately (only known by husband) very much considering leaving the marriage, say during perhaps a trip overseas she may decide not to return, potentially all of any inheritance monies, plus any expensive purchases already made with the inheritance monies, would belong to wife and would not have to be considered during the division of assets. Therefore, potentially, husband would be SOL for having access/ownership to any of the remaining funds, nor of the items purchased. He could end up with no RV/truck and none of that money.
Food for thinking.. ??

BBM

Lots of possibilities and an angle that may have only been seen from a distance but stands out now with more clarity.
Why the sudden camping trip ?
The timing right before her overseas trip seemed odd.

It's a possible motive for sure.

However it would be tough for BT, and an expensive legal battle, to get all of that money back, if in fact she bought those items with him.

Is other RV in his name or hers? How about the truck? If it's in his name, and her money was used, it would still be hard to take it from him, if there money had been in a joint account.

I don't know if it's true, my brother is a defense attorney, not a divorce lawyer, but he told me that if I put my inheritance in a money market fund, attached to our joint savings account, that I was then giving my husband permission to use any monies from that account, as his name is on it too. JMO

BBM

So we don't know yet if Barbara co-owned the plane, boat, fifth wheel, etc.

If I was BT family I would have found somebody early on to watch RT movements.
AND record suspicious activity.

I have no problem with that ; since the immediate family of Barbara's knows nothing -- other than the two interviews and then silence.
Her family knows about as much as we do, which is sad.
They must want to know if there's an increase in spending, for starters ?
As far as where he goes and what he does on a daily basis, it'd get expensive to keep an eye on him.
But financial records and bank activity could be looked at ?
The VI would like some answers, as well as her son and the other siblings of Barbara's.
So I would back up any of their efforts to know what happened.

I agree, but do you mean a private investigator? Hiring a PI can be prohibitively expensive.

Funds can be found some way.
Outsourcing ?
She needs to be found and her family deserves answers.
Imo.

 

[Seattle1]

As we approach another weekend, and nearly 90 days later, I'm sorry for Barbara's family and friends that she is no closer to being located.

Hopeful to read of a break in this missing person case soon.

 

[deugirtni]

The 'plane' was owned before BT came into RT's life, correct?

 

[deugirtni]

It is unfortunate, but I'll bet LE are not able to get banking/financial records from both of them from the time preceding and following BT's disappearance. I am wondering if there might be some larger cash withdrawal taken out in the time preceding (or perhaps following). To be prepared for services about to be rendered.

 

[Seattle1]

dbm

 

[LietKynes]

It is unfortunate, but I'll bet LE are not able to get banking/financial records from both of them from the time preceding and following BT's disappearance. I am wondering if there might be some larger cash withdrawal taken out in the time preceding (or perhaps following). To be prepared for services about to be rendered.

Admittedly,I don't like the sound of that...

That's why the poster who said "follow the money" (not sure-- was it you ? ) ; might've been on to something.
MOO

 

[shanadk]

Funds can be found some way.
Outsourcing ?
She needs to be found and her family deserves answers.
Imo.

Funds cannot always be found. I've been in that situation.
People with money can always get more money.
One of the great injustices in life.

 

[deugirtni]

Admittedly,I don't like the sound of that...

That's why the poster who said "follow the money" (not sure-- was it you ? ) ; might've been on to something.
MOO

No, wasn't me, but yes... must always follow the money to at least see where it leads, if anywhere. imo.