CA CA - Bob Harrod, 81, Orange County, 27 July 2009 - # 7

[believe09]

Welcome back DPM, we missed you!! (hugs)

Respectfully, no one was found guilty of elder abuse/fraud. In fact, the only case so far that has addressed it, the claim was found to be without merit. I would also respectfully point out that these gentlemen were free as air to do as they pleased with their own hard earned money, and as of this post no one has been found to be deficient in their faculties. So I would then point out that "killing the golden goose" makes the least sense of all of the scenarios to date. Aside from the fact that the person in question has a solid alibi as does her family members, (something which cannot be said for SIL as he is his own alibi-regretful but true) if she were the person she has been alleged, she would have been in an excellent position to perhaps blackmail Mr Harrod now that he had a new wife.

So as you say, back to square one with those espousing one theory and those espousing another.

Time to move everything forward and get the truth dont you think DPM?

ETA: I am curious as to why PPD would tell you who was and who was not suspects, DPM? Did you speak with Detective Radomski? I am a huge fan of his, and I cannot imagine that he would be so loosed lipped at this stage of the game.

 

[SuziQ]

BBM
I did type Not a Suspect..BUT, I have spoken with the PPD and they assured me the daughters were not suspects either..So, who are we to believe?? In answer to Cracka, I do believe Bob met with foul play but call me a Pollyanna..I think there are too many other avenues to blame just the family..

I am going to stay with the public documents that state they are POI's.

 

[SuziQ]

I believe this is a good time to bump up the public document that states clearly who the persons of interest are. IIRC, it is stated on page six of the enclosed pdf doc.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - CA CA - Bob Harrod, 81, Orange County, 27 July 2009 - #5

 

[Cubby]

Welcome back DPM, we missed you!! (hugs)

Respectfully, no one was found guilty of elder abuse/fraud. In fact, the only case so far that has addressed it, the claim was found to be without merit. I would also respectfully point out that these gentlemen were free as air to do as they pleased with their own hard earned money, and as of this post no one has been found to be deficient in their faculties. So I would then point out that "killing the golden goose" makes the least sense of all of the scenarios to date. Aside from the fact that the person in question has a solid alibi as does her family members, (something which cannot be said for SIL as he is his own alibi-regretful but true) if she were the person she has been alleged, she would have been in an excellent position to perhaps blackmail Mr Harrod now that he had a new wife.

So as you say, back to square one with those espousing one theory and those espousing another.

Time to move everything forward and get the truth dont you think DPM?

ETA: I am curious as to why PPD would tell you who was and who was not suspects, DPM? Did you speak with Detective Radomski? I am a huge fan of his, and I cannot imagine that he would be so loosed lipped at this stage of the game.

BBM. Excellent point and one I hadn't considered until this point.

Additionally it really makes one wonder why Bobs daughters insist on pounding a theory that has already been ruled out by LE.

And yes, time to move everything forward and get to the truth. Which would include answers to the tough questions SIL, daughters and GS have been evading for the last two years.

JMO

 

[DollyPardonMe]

Welcome back DPM, we missed you!! (hugs)

Respectfully, no one was found guilty of elder abuse/fraud. In fact, the only case so far that has addressed it, the claim was found to be without merit. I would also respectfully point out that these gentlemen were free as air to do as they pleased with their own hard earned money, and as of this post no one has been found to be deficient in their faculties. So I would then point out that "killing the golden goose" makes the least sense of all of the scenarios to date. Aside from the fact that the person in question has a solid alibi as does her family members, (something which cannot be said for SIL as he is his own alibi-regretful but true) if she were the person she has been alleged, she would have been in an excellent position to perhaps blackmail Mr Harrod now that he had a new wife.

So as you say, back to square one with those espousing one theory and those espousing another.

Time to move everything forward and get the truth dont you think DPM?

ETA: I am curious as to why PPD would tell you who was and who was not suspects, DPM? Did you speak with Detective Radomski? I am a huge fan of his, and I cannot imagine that he would be so loosed lipped at this stage of the game.

I have been gone awhile (before Radomski) so it was the detective that was handling the case prior. I had spoken to him regarding another HD in the area but was assured she was not the one. He also assured me the family were not suspects at that time. Obviously, I have been away a long time and have not seen these new documents nor do I care to because as I have always stated, I believe in the daughters!

 

[suzyq211]

The tendency is to always look closest at the last person known to have seen a MP, correct? In this case it would be JeM, the SIL. I would assume that he has been questioned intensively. I assume he has been cooperative with PPD not only to help find his FIL but also to clear himself so the investigation can progress. I am sure that if he cared for his wife and her family he would welcome any kind of interviews just to move forward. IMO of course.

 

[Cubby]

The tendency is to always look closest at the last person known to have seen a MP, correct? In this case it would be JeM, the SIL. I would assume that he has been questioned intensively. I assume he has been cooperative with PPD not only to help find his FIL but also to clear himself so the investigation can progress. I am sure that if he cared for his wife and her family he would welcome any kind of interviews just to move forward. IMO of course.

One would think so. However that would mean SIL JeM would have:

1)Cleared up the timeline - which he has not.
2)Cleared up what 'odd jobs' were done - which he has not.
3)Cleared up what Bob was wearing when last seen - which he has not.
4)Participated in Media interviews - which he has not.


Need I say more?

jmo

 

[Cazzie]

BBM~~


I don't find it strange they married quickly. They were in their eighties and seventies. Elderly people are very aware that they have limited time. They spoke on the phone every day for months. They knew they wanted to be together.

(Bob Harrod to Fontelle, 2009)"This is an opportunity of a life time we must get together. . . we must never again tempt fate as we did in the past."


As to why Fontelle stays, I look at it as someone who took their marriage vows seriously, someone who loves their husband. It would have been far easier for Fontelle to leave. Fontelle is Bob's advocate. She is the only family member who seems to care what happened to Bob.

BTW, Fontelle is legally blind.

(LA Times)"For the most part, Fontelle's days are quiet. Her eyes are bad, so she can't drive. One of Bob's former neighbors is helping her, bringing her food or taking her shopping. There are days when the desire to return to her own family makes her ache, but she resists leaving.

"I want to find out who did this to him," she says. "I want whatever is left of him to take home."


http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/02/local/la-me-disappeared3-2010feb03

THIS! (bolded by me)

Also, they were engaged when they were young...so they found each other again, when both were "available". So it is far from shocking that they moved quickly to be together "legally" (and perhaps in accordance with their religious or spiritual beliefs).

 

[believe09]

DPM, you are unflagging in your beliefs which I completely admire. I know we all agree that it is time to bring Bob home and give him the respect and honor he has earned.

 

[Angelo]

One would think so. However that would mean SIL JeM would have:

1)Cleared up the timeline - which he has not.
2)Cleared up what 'odd jobs' were done - which he has not.
3)Cleared up what Bob was wearing when last seen - which he has not.
4)Participated in Media interviews - which he has not.


Need I say more?

jmo

I'm wondering if JeM agreed to a polygraph. I bet he refused. It would be interesting to know if any of the daughters agreed to be polygraphed as well. If so, what were the results.

Daughter R posted on August 22, 2009:

"Did someone say polygraph again? Me first, me first, I wanna do it!"

 

[Angelo]

The tendency is to always look closest at the last person known to have seen a MP, correct? In this case it would be JeM, the SIL. I would assume that he has been questioned intensively. I assume he has been cooperative with PPD not only to help find his FIL but also to clear himself so the investigation can progress. I am sure that if he cared for his wife and her family he would welcome any kind of interviews just to move forward. IMO of course.

Very true.

IIRC, JeM was laid off in April 2009, a few months before Mr. Harrod disappeared. Money must have been tight UTH. Anyway, with JeM laid off, he would have had plenty of time to cooperate with PPD.

 

[Angelo]

After Bob disappeared, someone -- police won't say who -- told officers he might have regretted the decision to marry. For three days police thought they were dealing with a case of cold feet."



Posts from daughter R on the WWW

(8/6/2009) "Who really knows -- I guess he could have become leary that this time he bit off more than he could chew and did it too quickly. We just do not know what to think."

(8/16/2009) "Good, Bad, or indifferent, we are a family and he is OUR father! He abandoned us too and this is not like him!"

(8/14/2009) "POI statement that daughters are hiding D - I don't think so! We would so gladly return him home to F, instead of hiding him. Get real POI! He will have to face up to what he has done to Fontelle and make a decision whether he wants to stay married or not, whatever that decision might be, his daughters will have to accept it, period!"

(8/14/2009) "We don't mean to be non supportive but we really do not know why he left the house two days before she returned. They got married 6/29, she returned to MO 7/7, and came back to CA 7/29. They had only 8 days of marital bliss together. They spent eight days of "marital bliss" and then poof, he takes off with no explanation."

(8/21/2009) "I cannot understand who our Dad turned out to be and why he would just walk away from everything he worked so hard for, when he was fully aware F would be back in less than two days. Who is this stranger who gave up the chance for a new life with a new wife? Perhaps we never knew him or he had a problem he told nobody about...."












http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/02/local/la-me-disappeared3-2010feb03/2

 

[Opie]

It is wonderful to see so many recent posts on this thread, but we can only hope and pray that justice for Bob comes soon.

 

[nerdyglam]

After Bob disappeared, someone -- police won't say who -- told officers he might have regretted the decision to marry. For three days police thought they were dealing with a case of cold feet."



Posts from daughter R on the WWW

(8/6/2009) "Who really knows -- I guess he could have become leary that this time he bit off more than he could chew and did it too quickly. We just do not know what to think."

(8/16/2009) "Good, Bad, or indifferent, we are a family and he is OUR father! He abandoned us too and this is not like him!"

(8/14/2009) "POI statement that daughters are hiding D - I don't think so! We would so gladly return him home to F, instead of hiding him. Get real POI! He will have to face up to what he has done to Fontelle and make a decision whether he wants to stay married or not, whatever that decision might be, his daughters will have to accept it, period!"

(8/14/2009) "We don't mean to be non supportive but we really do not know why he left the house two days before she returned. They got married 6/29, she returned to MO 7/7, and came back to CA 7/29. They had only 8 days of marital bliss together. They spent eight days of "marital bliss" and then poof, he takes off with no explanation."

(8/21/2009) "I cannot understand who our Dad turned out to be and why he would just walk away from everything he worked so hard for, when he was fully aware F would be back in less than two days. Who is this stranger who gave up the chance for a new life with a new wife? Perhaps we never knew him or he had a problem he told nobody about...."





http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/02/local/la-me-disappeared3-2010feb03/2

These comments by R make it sound like she's angry at her father for abandoning them. Aren't the daughters the ones that claimed Bob was showing signs of dementia? Even if for some reason they didn't suspect foul play, if they really thought their father might be missing because of his dementia, why are the posting all these negative things about him?

I'm new to this case, but a lot of things this family says just doesn't add up to me...

 

[Angelo]

These comments by R make it sound like she's angry at her father for abandoning them. Aren't the daughters the ones that claimed Bob was showing signs of dementia? Even if for some reason they didn't suspect foul play, if they really thought their father might be missing because of his dementia, why are the posting all these negative things about him?

I'm new to this case, but a lot of things this family says just doesn't add up to me...

Agree. Cold feet, dementia, the Barber..........seems like they were putting anything out there to see if it stuck, anything but them.

In the news video linked below, the reporter quotes JuM as saying her father is showing signs of dementia. Mr. Harrods physician denies that claim!



http://www.ktla.com/videobeta/watch/?watch=ac85bbd7-919c-45df-8bff-de9407f59354&src=front

 

[Cazzie]

After Bob disappeared, someone -- police won't say who -- told officers he might have regretted the decision to marry. For three days police thought they were dealing with a case of cold feet."



Posts from daughter R on the WWW

(8/6/2009) "Who really knows -- I guess he could have become leary that this time he bit off more than he could chew and did it too quickly. We just do not know what to think."

(8/16/2009) "Good, Bad, or indifferent, we are a family and he is OUR father! He abandoned us too and this is not like him!"

(8/14/2009) "POI statement that daughters are hiding D - I don't think so! We would so gladly return him home to F, instead of hiding him. Get real POI! He will have to face up to what he has done to Fontelle and make a decision whether he wants to stay married or not, whatever that decision might be, his daughters will have to accept it, period!"

(8/14/2009) "We don't mean to be non supportive but we really do not know why he left the house two days before she returned. They got married 6/29, she returned to MO 7/7, and came back to CA 7/29. They had only 8 days of marital bliss together. They spent eight days of "marital bliss" and then poof, he takes off with no explanation."

(8/21/2009) "I cannot understand who our Dad turned out to be and why he would just walk away from everything he worked so hard for, when he was fully aware F would be back in less than two days. Who is this stranger who gave up the chance for a new life with a new wife? Perhaps we never knew him or he had a problem he told nobody about...."












http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/02/local/la-me-disappeared3-2010feb03/2

Ohmygosh, this makes me so angry!

Altho I guess it is pretty common that a criminal tries to not only cover up their involvement but does everything possible to throw red herrings out to detract attention from what really happened.

 

[Cubby]

I started re-reading Bobs threads from the beginning and noticed something I had either missed or forgotten previously.

Post #27 Thread 1 indicates the receipt SIL had for the home depot indicated he paid for his purchase at 3:04pm. This lines up with other MSM info from Loomis stating SIL paid for his purchase about 3pm.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - CA CA - Bob Harrod, 81, Orange County, 27 July 2009 - #1


So we have a 10:00 am and 3:00pm times from LE.

Where was SIL in the 5 hours between 10am and 3pm on the day of Bobs disappearance?

When LE or the PI hired by Bobs daughters canvassed the neighborhood did anyone indicate whether they saw SIL's truck there during the hours he alleges to have been doing odd jobs for Bob?

Or was the truck missing for several hours that SIL was supposed to be doing "odd jobs" and "home repairs" at Bobs home?

What odd jobs or home repairs took 4 hours to complete that day?

If this time stamped receipt was available just shy of 8 weeks after Bobs disappearance why has not one of Bobs California family been able to answer the timeline questions?

And lastly, why are some members of Bobs family apparently more concerned about their fathers second marriage and his estate than finding answers to what happened to Bob?

Remember Bob?

jmo

 

[askfornina]

omg, i read a few pages of this thread and it makes me so sad poor man.

 

[Montjoy]

omg, i read a few pages of this thread and it makes me so sad poor man.

Yes. And I have to say that my emotions were mixed about Bob becoming a spotlight case, while I know that all told it is a (very) good thing. Bob's story will strike a lot of nerves in a lot of different ways. I think that most folks are not of the mind where they hope there to be family complicity in the death of a family member, in this case a father, grandfather, great-grandfather. I feel so sad for those who could. For the rest of us, I know this is a hard situation (forgive the language) to wrap our brains around. Nobody wants to consider family members as responsible for dad/grand-dad/great-grand-dad's death.

And yet.

I think that like most readers/posters here I started out believing (or wanting to believe) that only a stranger could be responsible. But then I started to read...and I don't mean that I focused on the material presented here. I started to check the links. I followed up on them.

I can't say that I'm any happier about human nature at this point, but I think that the truth, that evidence, that impartial and professional accounts are the stars by which I must navigate, and I think that resolving myself to this will make me happier in the long run.

And I am not sure if I really replied to you here, Askfornina, but I so appreciate your comment and I hear you.

 

[Angelo]

One of the items Mr. Harrod left behind the day he disappeared were his glasses. Why would a man in his eighties leave his house without his glasses? Of course the assumption could be that Mr. Harrod left his house on July 27, 2009 in a condition where there was no need for glasses.

The glasses left behind seems to disprove any theory of Mr. Harrod leaving voluntarily. However, almost a year after Mr. Harrod's disappearance daughter RB posted the following on a message board.

"He had numerous old pairs of glasses. After his disappearance they were able to find three pairs in the house but we later noticed in a fairly recent photograph that he was wearing another pair that were not found. So much for that idea and the media’s focus and staged filming of the glasses on the table for dramatic effect."

Yet to this day the public has never seen this "recent" photograph supposedly showing Mr. Harrod in a pair of glasses that were not found at the house. Showing that photo would be helpful to the public.

Easy enough to show the picture on a reward poster. Easy enough to verify if Mr. Harrod really did own another pair of glasses.