CA CA - Bob Harrod, 81, Orange County, 27 July 2009 - #14

[believe09]

:tyou: To Disappeared and ID Network and Peacock Productions. If anyone has any information regarding the disappearance of Mr Harrod, please contact Detective Radomski of the Placentia Police Department 714-993-8176 or contact the Homicide Hotline at 714-993-8166 (case number 09-3263).

 

[tamild]

Important note, before I forget. PB stated on the show that she met Fontelle on June 24th.

 

[zwiebel]

bbm

Legally blind, really? Or do you mean his driver's license specifies he must drive with glasses on?

I doubt the CA DMV would permit anyone declared legally blind to drive at all.

~jmo~

I think they would. Our poster, GrainneDhu, answered that question very comprehensively in a post way, way back. She would tell you all about it, if she were able to be here.

You can drive in the US if you are legally blind, but there may be restrictions on things like night driving.

I think. I live in Germany though. No speed limit on many highways, so the main requirement to driving on them seems to be insanity, is all I know.

 

[believe09]

When Googling Dad's name, PLEASE consider several differing opinions can be found:

1. There are differing opinions and differing levels of objectivity about the Police investigation into my father's disappearance.
Please remember that Law Enforcement always knows much, much more than they can publicly release at any time, regarding an ongoing active investigation such as this, for reasons that should be obvious

2. Discussions of my father’s case can be found all over the internet. There are a few different message boards, where viewpoints and opinions discussed, about my father's disappearence, are completely different.

3. It is already bad enough that our father is missing, without the further victimization experienced by each individual member of Dad's biological family from the evil and anonymous internet speculation, gossip, stalking, and unsubstantiated slanderous accusations stemming from “armchair sleuthing” sites.

4. I believe that, no matter the opinion, WE ALL want nothing more than resolution and JUSTICE regarding our father's mysterious disappearance!
Most of all, I want the TRUTH, the whole truth and nothing but

5. Detective Radomski has been well aware of all of the internet chatter from the beginning, though he's told me that you have to consider the sources". I agree, though it has been hard to ignore perfect strangers in surreal discussion of MY family as if they think they know our father and us.
Those discssions and the online stalking have been so off-base, creepy, and beyond stressful to endure.[/

6. Regarding the reward offered by the biological family of Bob Harrod:
Bob Harrod's newest FAMILY members by marriage, are ALSO excluded from receiving any reward.

PLEASE bear all these things in mind as you may be inclined to surf the net and encounter discussions about my father, Robert Merle Harrod, missing since 7/27/09.

I began a thread some time ago on City-Data.com regarding Mr Harrod's case. This post appeared a short time ago-now the writer claims to be a relative of Mr Harrod's, so take it for what it is worth. I do not know this to be true.

I bolded and underlined number 4 because I think that this is a given no matter what crime board you choose for your discussion.

But, regarding number 6, you will have to come up with something better. If the writer is indeed a family member of Bob's. Clearly the implication is that both sides of the family, Mrs Harrod's AND Mr Harrod's, are so money driven that they would....well....what? Tell the truth to get the reward money?

:waitasec:

Isnt that what you want? How about by any means necessary we will bring out Dad home and who cares who gives the information that gets this done????

:shrug:

LINK HERE

 

[zwiebel]

Still trying to take it all in...

Housekeeper arrives at noon, JeM about 15 minutes later. JeM leaves shortly before Housekeeper. Housekeeper left at around 3pm. We have verification that the hardware receipt was from just after 3pm. So JeM stopped at the store on the way home?

Yes. Yet whatever he bought, he never returned to the house to use it in finishing up those repairs, as he promised.

Hope he didn't bill Bob for whatever it was he bought.

 

[shana]

BBM

You spoke about Josie's son in your first post.....the switched to Fontelle in your second post....

Call me confused....:blushing:

Sorry, scorekeeper...been a long day (yep, I saw you on the scanner thread this morning, and wasn't that a wonderful outcome!).

As well, I appear to be the only one here with questions that go against the majority. I'm OK with that, and will do better trying to track the rapid-fire posts at at time like tonight when I'm coming-down with a cold on top of all else.

Carrion!

~jmo~

 

[believe09]

:welcome6: to our guests...you have no idea how happy we are to see you here. There is a wealth of information complete with media links and timelines and documents. Grab a cup and help us draw as much attention as we can to this special man. The time has come to bring him back to the wife who loves and misses him very, very much.

 

[Frenchbeaux]

I just finished watching the ID show about Bob. I wish I had come across his case earlier as his story broke my heart. Without knowing much about the case, I don't have much to offer except what I learned from ID. Is it just me, or did the daughters seem like highly probable suspects? In my opinion the sure tell signs how they got frustrated that Bob couldn't answer questions about a trust Bob and his wife created and which I have to assume they had never contributed to, their "concern" of an 80yr old man moving too fast in a relationship, and how they would refer to Fontelle as his wife and not by name. That just seemed to me like they had a lack of compassion either because they were being greedy or because of their grieving over their mother. Maybe it's just me, but I've never felt anything less than utmost compassion and love towards my step parents even when they could be cold and mean because of the love my parents had for them and because I didn't like my parents having to live alone at their age. I admire all of your dedication to finding Bob! May justice be served!

 

[cluciano63]

This is the saddest case to me and partly why I post so seldom, but I have followed along. I just feel convinced this is all about the greed of the daughters and if so, it makes me sick. I cannot even imagine confronting my parents about their money, trust or no trust. It just makes me sick. Just so sick.

 

[shana]

I think they would. Our poster, GrainneDhu, answered that question very comprehensively in a post way, way back. She would tell you all about it, if she were able to be here.

You can drive in the US if you are legally blind, but there may be restrictions on things like night driving.

I think. I live in Germany though. No speed limit on many highways, so the main requirement to driving on them seems to be insanity, is all I know.

LOL zwie, you never fail to amuse!

I'm sorry GrainneDhu is not able to be here; but even so, she does not live in California.

Perhaps the definition of "legally blind" needs to be clarified, from the POV of the DMV and social services (aid to the blind).

~jmo~

 

[Frenchbeaux]

I began a thread some time ago on City-Data.com regarding Mr Harrod's case. This post appeared a short time ago-now the writer claims to be a relative of Mr Harrod's, so take it for what it is worth. I do not know this to be true.

I bolded and underlined number 4 because I think that this is a given no matter what crime board you choose for your discussion.

But, regarding number 6, you will have to come up with something better. If the writer is indeed a family member of Bob's. Clearly the implication is that both sides of the family, Mrs Harrod's AND Mr Harrod's, are so money driven that they would....well....what? Tell the truth to get the reward money?

:waitasec:

Isnt that what you want? How about by any means necessary we will bring out Dad home and who cares who gives the information that gets this done????

:shrug:

LINK HERE

I concur! I also thought #6 validated my point of the daughters greed (if that was indeed her who posted) - how is the point about his wife not getting a reward relevant to her post or plea to help find her father? To me, it just reiterates that the new wife having access to their assets disturbs them. And how could they live with their conscious of not helping Fontelle after she uprooted to move there and arrived then left with nothing. They just seem evil in my opinion. Wow!

 

[etamine]

bbm

Legally blind, really? Or do you mean his driver's license specifies he must drive with glasses on?

I doubt the CA DMV would permit anyone declared legally blind to drive at all.

~jmo~

I don't know how this works in america, but from my experience working in a UK opticians certain limits are there at which point the person is classed as having a complex prescription and must legally receive help towards their eyecare costs.

If interested, these limits are a spherical power of over 10 dioptres in either direction, OR a cylindrical power of 5 dioptres in either direction - there's a limit for prism prescription too but I can't remember what that was as I never came across it very often.

If the sight can be fully corrected with glasses then the person is legal to drive with their glasses on, if not then they aren't allowed to drive.

Now obviously this bit is speculation, based on this the glasses in this photo - https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/733859_526877524025840_1602000303_n.jpg

From what I can tell, Mr Harrod had a prescription for myopia, but certainly nowhere near the size of a 10 dioptre lens (unless they've been thinned, but they look too thick for what I've seen from even the very upper limit of lens thinning.) He doesn't seem to have any extreme astigmatism needing to be corrected by a high cylindrical power. He appears to be wearing bifocals, so those aren't his reading glasses which would have a lower power if he has myopia.

I'd assume he was legal to drive providing he was wearing those glasses, but his prescription was not high enough to breach those upper limits.

 

[MaryNo]

Spot on! I'm shocked someone didn't have to call the fire dept. to put out the fire in their pants .. liar liar! Disinfo like nothing I've seen in a loooong while.

I wanted to add the comments the two daughters made on the now defunct other forum of money being Bob's god, etc., tonight "Dad wasn't materialistic" Say what???????? I had to watch twice tonight. Trash talked Bob like he was a greedy bag of garbage on that forum. "Don't get us wrong ... blah blah blah" blecch

They DID try to have Fontelle thrown out on her azz, yet, claimed they tried to get Fontelle's needs met.

They knew Josie (Barber) and hubby were cleared, yet, continue trying to detract by pointing the finger at her.

Adding the above to your list Believe09, and we have a lot of inconsistent statements by the daughters.

These two did everything they could to get some of us banned (defunct forum) when defending Bob, and trying to talk about this case - some of us banned twice (Me, for one)! Tonight, there were even tears. They speak out of both sides of their mouths.

I know don't about anyone else, but if I didn't know better, I'd have thought tonight's show was about concerned daughters who missed and loved their missing father. So unreal, that I almost forgot it was Bob's case being discussed. Yuck ... what a bunch ...

I hate the impression some of this gave to the folks who haven't followed the case.

On a personal note: That Fontelle ROCKS! :rose: I was thrilled that law enforcement has "their number".

I think the point counterpoint between LE and Bob's daughters was interesting.

Girls: Bob doesnt drive on the hwy
LE: Bob drove on the hwy
Girls: Bob mentally slipping
LE: talked to his Dr and Bob was in fantastic health and LE goes on to state in great detail how Bob was fully capable of caring for himself and his finances.
Girls: Meeting was jovial
LE: Meeting was heated
Girls: BL had motive
LE: Why would BL kill goose laying golden eggs?

But most importantly, the motive for the crime is the fight for the money in the trusts. Well that pretty much eliminates BL and Mrs Harrod which leaves us......jmo.

 

[believe09]

I don't know how this works in america, but from my experience working in a UK opticians certain limits are there at which point the person is classed as having a complex prescription and must legally receive help towards their eyecare costs.

If interested, these limits are a spherical power of over 10 dioptres in either direction, OR a cylindrical power of 5 dioptres in either direction - there's a limit for prism prescription too but I can't remember what that was as I never came across it very often.

If the sight can be fully corrected with glasses then the person is legal to drive with their glasses on, if not then they aren't allowed to drive.

Now obviously this bit is speculation, based on this the glasses in this photo - https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/733859_526877524025840_1602000303_n.jpg

From what I can tell, Mr Harrod had a prescription for myopia, but certainly nowhere near the size of a 10 dioptre lens (unless they've been thinned, but they look too thick for what I've seen from even the very upper limit of lens thinning.) He doesn't seem to have any extreme astigmatism needing to be corrected by a high cylindrical power. He appears to be wearing bifocals, so those aren't his reading glasses which would have a lower power if he has myopia.

I'd assume he was legal to drive providing he was wearing those glasses, but his prescription was not high enough to breach those upper limits.

:thud:

What you said. :blushing:

 

[zwiebel]

Bonsoir, Frenchbeaux! And I've been up all night so I've forgotten the French for welcome...bienvue?

Anyway, thanks so much for dropping into Bob's thread.

 

[zwiebel]

LOL zwie, you never fail to amuse!

I'm sorry GrainneDhu is not able to be here; but even so, she does not live in California.

Perhaps the definition of "legally blind" needs to be clarified, from the POV of the DMV and social services (aid to the blind).

~jmo~

Thank you. I think?

 

[scorekeeper]

Sorry, scorekeeper...been a long day (yep, I saw you on the scanner thread this morning, and wasn't that a wonderful outcome!).

As well, I appear to be the only one here with questions that go against the majority. I'm OK with that, and will do better trying to track the rapid-fire posts at at time like tonight when I'm coming-down with a cold on top of all else.

Carrion!

~jmo~

Yes, the hikers were very lucky to found!! I love the scanner thread; just type what you think you hear...LOL

I am trying to "learn" about Mr. Harrod's very strange disappearance and watching the show tonight drew me to this thread.

It can be very frustrating jumping in a middle of a case, especially when everyone else has been here since day 1 but as usual, WS is here to find out about Mr. Harrod's disappearance!

Thanks so much for everyone's patience!

So, did you mean Josie in your second post and not Fontelle?

 

[Frenchbeaux]

Spot on! I'm shocked someone didn't have to call the fire dept. to put out the fire in their pants .. liar liar! Disinfo like nothing I've seen in a loooong while.

I wanted to add the comments the two daughters made on the now defunct other forum of money being Bob's god, etc., tonight "Dad wasn't materialistic" Say what???????? I had to watch twice tonight. Trash talked Bob like he was a greedy bag of garbage on that forum. "Don't get us wrong ... blah blah blah" blecch

They DID try to have Fontelle thrown out on her azz, yet, claimed they tried to get Fontelle's needs met.

They knew Josie (Barber) and hubby were cleared, yet, continue trying to detract by pointing the finger at her.

Adding the above to your list Believe09, and we have a lot of inconsistent statements by the daughters.

These two did everything they could to get some of us banned (defunct forum) when defending Bob, and trying to talk about this case - some of us banned twice (Me, for one)! Tonight, there were even tears. They speak out of both sides of their mouths.

I know don't about anyone else, but if I didn't know better, I'd have thought tonight's show was about concerned daughters who missed and loved their missing father. So unreal, that I almost forgot it was Bob's case being discussed. Yuck ... what a bunch ...

I hate the impression some of this gave to the folks who haven't followed the case.

On a personal note: That Fontelle ROCKS! :rose: I was thrilled that law enforcement has "their number".

Way to go for being a rebel on that forum! If it makes you feel any better, I just heard of Bobs case through ID and saw right through that bunch. Despicable is right!

 

[Seajay]

The last person to have seen Bob? And it took four days to talk to him?

Bob was 81. Legally blind, according to media reports. Couldn't walk far. Didn't take his car.

Somebody slipped up there.

Why?

I think because one of the daughters put the bug in their ear that he was second guessing getting married again and that he took off to think about it. They gave LE information that led them away from the fact he was really missing and not off on a retreat. IMO

 

[tamild]

Respectfully snipped

I hate the impression some of this gave to the folks who haven't followed the case.

Fear not, MaryNo! My husband and daughter both watched with me, and neither of them knew a thing about the case before the show aired. Let's just say their impressions of Bob's family were not favorable.