CANADA Canada - Audrey Gleave, 73, Ancaster ON, 30 Dec 2010 #3

[Woodland]

Bottom line on the will - Lynne Allyson Vanstone is the first appointed executor with the alternative being Robert William Vanstone.

AG left her entire estate to LAG. Should LAV have predeceased AG, the entire estate would have gone to RWV.

 

[Hazel]

:gthanks: Woodland! WOW!

Will await for Sillybilly to ask the questions, she's very knowledgeable about those things.

>>> What jumps at me is that the 2 witnesses share the same address, and there doesn't appear to have been any lawyer present, when the Will was signed in simple blank paper.

>>> Plus one of the signatures looks like AG's?!!!! :waitasec: don't know what to think!

>>> also, who is the "Trustee"? and where does it say that LV is the executor?

>>> Would the witnesses be the friend in Brantford, that LV said Audrey never mentioned to her? If I recall correctly, LV herself lives in Brantford.

She said that Gleave was so private that she never mentioned that she had another friend in Brantford who lived in the same neighbourhood as Vanstone.

http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2913418

 

[Hazel]

Bottom line on the will - Lynne Allyson Vanstone is the first appointed executor with the alternative being Robert William Vanstone.

AG left her entire estate to LAG. Should LAV have predeceased AG, the entire estate would have gone to RWV.

Thanks again Woodland,
That answers one of my questions (about the 'executor')

Nothing left for her dogs? I mean, wouldn't she at least had mentioned "her babies"?
And nothing for any of her Wednesday buddies neither? Wouldn't it make more sense to have made one or two of them 'witnesses'? or even Suzie.

No donations for any disease research? no charity? no pets, animals rights?

And why not leave at least the Camaro to her young handyman? Oh, wait! She had not purchased the Camaro at the time of the Will, but years later, right?

and there is nobody to contest the Will

 

[Woodland]

Hazel - thank-you for the question to clarify who is the trustee - it's Lynne Allyson Vanstone, ie first executor of the will dated 23 Feb 2007. LAV has not signed this will as a witness, only the court documents that she has a will in hand to present.

My mind is whirling with this info so may not have covered all that I know at the moment.

The video attached below is not knew, nor my personal unvoiced opinion on it. I accept any criticism that may follow that I only now say what I thought before.

http://www.chch.com/index.php/home/item/1654-friend-occupying-gleave-home

How upset does LAV seem 5 days following the gruesome murder of her friend of 30 years or so? I realize one has to do what one has to do under grave circumstances from time to time.

From personal experience, my sister suddenly passed away on the morning of 25 Dec 2007 - 20 minutes before most of the family could drive to the hospital following an alert at 7:30 am that all was suddenly not well (we were going to meet at the hospital at 1:00 pm). As the oldest sibling, I was strong for the family for 2 days, especially for my mother, making/ bringing food to our gathering place on the evening of the 25th. After fighting reality for 48 hours - forget it. I was a basket case including the day of the funeral and make no apologies.

The emotional toll set in afterwards for me and stayed for quite some time until I could come to terms with the natural causes of my sisters passing. If she was 'taken' from us, well that would be another story. Jmo.

 

[Valleyboy]

Clause 4.6 reads - I direct my Trustee to hold a gift of residue to any child of mine under the age of 18 years and keep the gift invested upon the trust of each child is to receive the capital of the gift, together with any income earned to the date of payment, less encroachments, when each child reaches 18.

My lawyer said this is peculiar in a will as it means the gift to LV can't be an absolute gift. The minor kids would come first. I pointed out that AG is not 'known' to have kids but it has been speculated that she might have had one or more children at some point in her life.

If my lawyer was acting for anyone regarding this will he would question the mental competence of AG at the time of writing the will.

A legal eagle awaits the questions.

So did AG have children that no one knew about or what.


This is getting stranger as time goes by.

 

[Woodland]

While my lawyer questioned the mental competency of AG writing this will, I sooooo question if she in fact wrote it.

The lawyer was adamant that one does not mention children, minor children or their offspring if one never had children. Apparently your lawyer would advise that such thinking would be redundant. Is someone trying to lend authenticity in case it is found AG did in fact have a child/children?

 

[nicgumshoe]

Nice job Woodland! Excellent work!

I'm wondering about the "kids" part. Sounds to me like she may have written the will long ago, b4 having kids, or had kid(s) at the time, and then maybe just quickly rewrote it in 2007 and for some reason left in that part...maybe to show any kids that they were once accounted for.

I don't really question the blank paper thing, or the lack of a lawyer's stamp/seal. In fact, I can imagine AG thinking of lawyers adversely. I've written out a will this way myself figuring if it's legal it's legal. And I kept mine to what I read was a legal format. Oddly enough, at one time, because I didn't know anyone in an area I was living in, I contemplated being a fake witness(es) to my own will (but then decided against it).

That said, I think for some folks, writing a will is a hard thing to do, and they enter a different than normal frame of mind when doing it. Some like to make it fast and simple, and then get back to life.

I have to agree though, the system likes to rubber stamp them, and many turn the other way when someone mentions contesting a will. I've seen that before.

 

[Canadian4]

Bottom line on the will - Lynne Allyson Vanstone is the first appointed executor with the alternative being Robert William Vanstone.

Is RWV the husband or brother of LAV? It makes it even odder to me that PK was left out.

Also I remember finding and posting a site where someone with the same name as AG was looking for a child she gave up for adoption the year AG graduated for Mac. I think we decided at the time it was someone different but who knows, maybe that would explain the odd clause in her will.

 

[Woodland]

Explanations are what the lawyer that obtained the copy of this will would very much like to have in light of her sudden and unexplained demise.

 

[Woodland]

Will through out a few questions.

If a lawyer questions the signatures and clauses regarding children, has LE done the same?

If a provision was made for potential children to come forward, do they still have to be minor children at this stage? What if they are not minors now? The lawyer began to relate a similar case of a 75 year-old woman with the same clauses, but we never finished that thought for some reason. Will do so tomorrow.

How obligated was LV to make a provision for children of AG and for how long? What if they have minor children? What happens if children or grandchildren of AG come forward now?

Does anyone else question the validity of the will? Is it a possible motive?

This will troubles me. AG was not the recluse or loner that her executor said she was.

I recall speculation/grumbling early on regarding LV purchasing a new vehicle soon after AG was gone - that LE had questioned her about that.

 

[bodhi93]

Is RWV the husband or brother of LAV? It makes it even odder to me that PK was left out.

Also I remember finding and posting a site where someone with the same name as AG was looking for a child she gave up for adoption the year AG graduated for Mac. I think we decided at the time it was someone different but who knows, maybe that would explain the odd clause in her will.

From what I can tell it looks like RWV is LAV's brother. http://yourlifemoments.ca/sitepages/obituary.asp?oid=406543

BTW: Thank you to Woodland for all of your hard work!!!

Still a lot of questions....

 

[Sillybilly]

Ugh … lost a big long post, so here goes another one.

Woodland, can you tell me if each page of the Will was initialled by AG and both of the witnesses? (This eliminates the possibility of someone substituting pages within a Will.)

It is normal for a Will to be on blank paper .. I would find it unusual that it be on letterhead. However, (if the LWT was prepared by a law firm and things haven’t changed in Ontario), the firm would affix what is called a “back” that contains simple wording to the effect:

LAST WILL & TESTAMENT
OF
NAME OF TESTATOR

Dated

NAME OF LAW FIRM
Address of law firm

I strongly suspect this Will was not drawn up by a law firm. It’s been quite a few years since I’ve dealt with Wills, but basically the order of a Will is:

REVOKE any former Wills

APPOINT Executor/Trustee and possible alternates

Then direct Executor/Trustee to pay debts, funeral expenses, taxes, etc

Then BEQUESTS and LEGACIES (directing Trustee to make specific bequests, i.e. “ sapphire ring to my sister”, or “ $1000 to my nephew Sam, etc)

RESIDUE TO TRUSTEE (to deal with in their capacity as Executor, NOT in their personal capacity …. It’s just authorizing the Trustee to deal with everything else that is left over after bequests/legacies, according to the specific wishes of the Testator, i.e. to my wife … in the event my wife should predecease me, then equally among my children, etc.

So, yes … the minor children clause is a surprise because we are not aware of AG having any children whatsoever. I would really need to study the Will to see in what order everything was stipulated. IMO, it’s unheard of and not possible to transfer the RESIDUE to LV in her personal capacity, and THEN stipulate that a gift should be made to any minor children. Just doesn’t make sense because once the residue is tranferred to a sole beneficiary, it is then theirs to do with as they please.

The two witnesses to AG’s Will seem to be friends or associates in the doggy world (possibly obedience trainers?).Their names appear here:

http://www.colmars.com/Results/Results 2008/RESULTS 2008 10 1 MARKED CATALOGUE OBEDIENCE London.pdf

Rhea V also shows in the 1961 Brantford Collegiate Institute yearbook, Grade 10:

http://www.e-yearbook.com/yearbooks...ional_School_Hello_Yearbook/1961/Page_89.html

 

[dotr]

While my lawyer questioned the mental competency of AG writing this will, I sooooo question if she in fact wrote it.

The lawyer was adamant that one does not mention children, minor children or their offspring if one never had children. Apparently your lawyer would advise that such thinking would be redundant. Is someone trying to lend authenticity in case it is found AG did in fact have a child/children?

I wonder if this will is just one of those "do it yourselfers" sold in stationary stores because that might account for a standard question concerning children.

 

[Woodland]

Sillybilly - each page of the Will is initialed by AG and the witnesses and it is in the order you have quoted above - revoking previous Wills etc.

 

[Sillybilly]

I wonder if this will is just one of those "do it yourselfers" sold in stationary stores because that might account for a standard question concerning children.

Certainly could be a DIY dotr. That is a non-standard and very non-specific clause however, and certainly seems to be in the wrong place in the Will. If the residue of the estate was already left to LV in her personal capacity and "for her own use absolutely" (standard terminology), it means that nobody else is entitled to anything subsequent to that ... in which case any subsequent clause relating to a minor child, or anyone else for that matter, couldn't apply as the residue was already given away.

Additionally, this strange clause does not stipulate an amount, which can (IMO) only be interpreted that the "gift" is the entire "residue", not a portion of it, otherwise either a $$ figure or a percentage would have been set out.

 

[nicgumshoe]

I wonder if the clause about the minor children was done to prevent someone coming forward and claiming to be a child. ie: AG was near 70 and lived alone when the will was written. Maybe she felt someone might wait until she's gone and then claim to be a child and contest it. But if the will stipulates they get nothing if they're over 18, then all is well. She may have worried about older people claiming this (a long lost child), because it could easily be proven she had no kids in her 50's, while a teacher.

 

[nicgumshoe]

Will through out a few questions.

If a lawyer questions the signatures and clauses regarding children, has LE done the same?

If a provision was made for potential children to come forward, do they still have to be minor children at this stage? What if they are not minors now? The lawyer began to relate a similar case of a 75 year-old woman with the same clauses, but we never finished that thought for some reason. Will do so tomorrow.

How obligated was LV to make a provision for children of AG and for how long? What if they have minor children? What happens if children or grandchildren of AG come forward now?

Does anyone else question the validity of the will? Is it a possible motive?

This will troubles me. AG was not the recluse or loner that her executor said she was.

I recall speculation/grumbling early on regarding LV purchasing a new vehicle soon after AG was gone - that LE had questioned her about that.

I'm not sure about the technical validity. If it gets contested I suppose we'll find out

I'd say it's motive for a real (unknown) child. Given that clause about the child/children we have to wonder. Also motive for PK if he felt he should be getting something. (After knowing someone for only a few years, I wouldn't expect a cent....but you never know.)

Given the nature of the murder, I just can't see any LV involvement, unless some male in her family would benefit from her receiving money. But the sexual component tells me otherwise. If it had been just a mysterious murder without that part, I'd be more inclined to think it might be Will related. But again...you never know "what evil lurks in the hearts of men"...(or something like that).

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

To WOODLAND:

:gthanks::yourock::tyou::gthanks:

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Quoted from nicgumshoe:

I'd say it's motive for a real (unknown) child. Given that clause about the child/children we have to wonder. Also motive for PK if he felt he should be getting something. (After knowing someone for only a few years, I wouldn't expect a cent....but you never know.)


My first question is about this 'unknown child/children'. I'm wondering if AG had foster children and if she considered herself a godmother to them.

Regarding PK here - I cannot imagine him thinking he'd be given anything in AG's will unless they talked about it. But given AG's private nature, I can't see her saying to PK that he should be in her will.

Something else is niggling at me here - for some reason, I don't see this killing as money/property motivated. It seems too hateful for that. Too gruesome for that. Too personal for that.:twocents:

 

[Woodland]

Small note on the date of AG's Will - her 70th birthday (maybe the day before). 23 Feb 2007.

Another question I will ask is, the filing of the Will is dated 28 January 2011 with personal property valued at $50+ and the house at $425K. Was the value of the house inserted later when it was known what it would sell for almost 2 months later?

What about bank accounts? Should they have been listed? AG bought an expensive (compared to a lot) new car and she planned to live on what if $50K included everything but the house? Seems low.