GA GA - Shirley, 87, & Russell Dermond, 88, Putnam County, 2 May 2014 - # 5

[Razz]

I actually think it's just one, depending really on state laws. It would typically be an A/B Trust to avoid the federal inheritance tax rates. The A/B refers to the ownership, with A and B being a married couple. Without establishing this kind of trust, a married couple would pay inheritance tax on anything over around a million that passes from one to the other in death. The amount in a trust that can be passed tax free between spouses is around $5 million before it is then subject to the federal inheritance tax rates.

So, essentially, if RD left everything to his children, anything over $1 million would be subject to the federal inheritance tax. But, by establishing a trust like this that goes thru both spouses (regardless if they die together or at separate times) and then filters down to another party, that tax free amount rises to around the $5 million mark.

That's not chump change, if you consider what the inheritance tax rate is!

Wouldn't it make sense to have 2 then? I suspect their assets exceeded a million.

 

[Razz]

I actually think it's just one, depending really on state laws. It would typically be an A/B Trust to avoid the federal inheritance tax rates. The A/B refers to the ownership, with A and B being a married couple. Without establishing this kind of trust, a married couple would pay inheritance tax on anything over around a million that passes from one to the other in death. The amount in a trust that can be passed tax free between spouses is around $5 million before it is then subject to the federal inheritance tax rates.

So, essentially, if RD left everything to his children, anything over $1 million would be subject to the federal inheritance tax. But, by establishing a trust like this that goes thru both spouses (regardless if they die together or at separate times) and then filters down to another party, that tax free amount rises to around the $5 million mark.

That's not chump change, if you consider what the inheritance tax rate is!

I'm a tad confused. Are you saying there can be one trust, but 2 people can be co-owners
of that trust? Do they not have to have separate trusts to qualify for the 5 million cap?

 

[J Block]

It would be interesting to know whether the killer cut medically, severing the spine between the 2nd and 3rd vertebrae for ease of movement.
That would help LE in the right direction.

Very interesting. Great thinking. Somewhere between C2 & C3, just above Adam's Apple ?

 

[Eileen730]

Well One thing we DO know.

It is not a murder suicide!

 

[tlcya]

I'm a tad confused. Are you saying there can be one trust, but 2 people can be co-owners
of that trust? Do they not have to have separate trusts to qualify for the 5 million cap?

I have seen them done separately and I have seen them done jointly by married couples.

The Irrevocable Dermond Family Trust 2014-06 (EXAMPLE - not the actual name of any trust that I would know exists)

 

[Litig8ter]

Well One thing we DO know.

It is not a murder suicide!

Only in the "Old South".

 

[MotherOcean]

I have thought about this quite a bit. I have also thought about the life of folks in their late 80's. Home, church, out to dinner, visiting friends.

Who would their deaths hurt the most?

1. Family
2. Friends
3. Community

Who done it?

1. Random
2. A Sigg or Gardner type
3. Some lowly person they unintentionally offended...a nut case to be exact.

It seems the type of person that would behead somebody in a very well planned out murder like this was would be a person with lots of hate that had been brewing for a long time.

This was planned and executed to a T. That is why I don't think they decapitated Mr. D to hide evidence. They didn't make a mistake there and realize it on the scene and then have all the equiptment to decapitate somebody.

Nobody come to a murder with a gun, makes a mistake and pulls out a machete or knife to decapitate.

MOO

I just can't see the beheading being an after-thought or something done in the heat of the moment. That's why I think it probably wasn't taken to conceal evidence. So, I have to consider other reasons it may have occurred.

 

[shadow of my mind]

My revised Theory –

Both Mr. and Mrs. D were originally going to be taken and held for ransom/extortion or as a warning to “keep quite”. (About what I have no idea) Mrs. or Mr. D resisted and the perp ended up hitting them over the head, killing them.

Now the ‘plan’ needed to change in mid stream. Mr. D was beheaded. The head was removed and disposed of somewhere else and the headless body was left behind to make it look like a demented serial killing and Mrs. D’s body was put in the lake to make it look like she had been abducted. All to totally confuse LE and to basically divide LE in their operational tasks and allow more time for the perp to get back to their other life.

The planning or active parts of the crime; finding and accessing the property, not being seen, being able to leave un-noticed, not leaving a huge messy crime scene with easy evidence, or stealing anything was very well thought out and organized, but the thought process ended up being flawed; pep did not anticipate that the D’s, because of them being older, would resist at all. This change in plans made the crime appear as if was for two different conflicting reasons.

A ransom/extortion plan could very well mean that someone has insider knowledge (or thought they did) of finances and was under the impression that it would be easy money and readily forthcoming. Also possibly for a re-payment for something that they felt they had been cheated out of or to force a decision about future finances.

A “keep quite” warning would still potentially be plausible. If that was what this was about from the start, then with S&R dead; problem solved, even if the actually killing part was non-intentional. If it was not the elder D’s themselves that the warning was originally for, then the warning is still viable and the perp can still achieve what he wants.

Who are the ones suppose to keep quiet, and about what, then becomes the next question.

The perp would not necessarily need to be anybody close to the elder D’s. Anyone who at all “appeared” somewhat familiar, at least by sight, would most likely not have aroused any suspension until it was too late.

It would also not need to be someone who lived in the community, just someone who could look and act like they knew the D’s. It would not take too much work to determine what the D’s routine was. Look at the information that is available right on the net about the area. The church has an extensive website with newsletters available to read through, and the problems within the HOA was viewable to anyone who looked it up. The layout of the house and the property lines are public information. Now add a Google Earth program in the mix and you can see the entire area up close. The knowledge of how to use a nautical chart of the lake and one trial run with some basic navigational skills would allow someone to use dead reckoning to maneuver on the lake at night without having to be familiar with the lake at all. The key would to be able to use the same boat or small differences in size, draft, prop dimension and calibrated speed tends to have an accumulated effect, and if not compensated for, mistakes can be made and you miss your target.

I still believe that this horrific crimes motivation was for financial reasons in some way; either to gain more or keep what they have. If it was not for money, then it was to insure that something remained unknown.

 

[MotherOcean]

It could have been early and the alarm not set yet. Or if Mr. D. went outside to run off the intruders at the dock, he would have unset the alarm. Also just jumped into my mind, if the alarm was set how did the neighbors go in to check on them or how did the LE get in? So, many questions. :banghead::banghead:

The front door was unlocked. One of the neighbors entered the house through the front door. Didn't find the Dermonds, so then went to the garage.

 

[MotherOcean]

Good questions and I also wonder why the house wasn't broken into or anything stolen. jmo

If it was a "thrill kill" done by a predator then he probably didn't care a thing about material things. He came to kill for the sake of killing.

 

[mck16]

The front door was unlocked. One of the neighbors entered the house through the front door. Didn't find the Dermonds, so then went to the garage.

Thank you for that confirmation. jmo

 

[MotherOcean]

If the person(s) is a resident of LO, I think they're sticking around as to not draw attention to being someone who's left the area after committing a crime.

Yes. We could've learned a lot from IK. Both psychologically as well as identifying more of his victims.

I think he could be a part-time resident who is only there on week-ends and holidays or vacation days. There are many residents who have main homes in Atlanta or Augusta. The crime happened on a week-end, so that coupled with early reports of a large number of homes vacated for long periods of time got me to thinking that he may have a legitimate reason to be gone (in the eyes of neighbors).

 

[MotherOcean]

Thank you for that confirmation. jmo

Sorry I didn't provide a link to verify. I will try to find one!

 

[Hickory Born]

I think he could be a part-time resident who is only there on week-ends and holidays or vacation days. There are many residents who have main homes in Atlanta or Augusta. The crime happened on a week-end, so that coupled with early reports of a large number of homes vacated for long periods of time got me to thinking that he may have a legitimate reason to be gone (in the eyes of neighbors).

I just cannot see your average professional (doctor, lawyer, CEO) working five days a week and living a in million-dollar home in Atlanta with another million-dollar home on Lake Oconee killing two elderly people over a weekend. The stakes had to be really high!

 

[OTPTarheel]

"Off with his head

more like this...
...other phrases about:
Parts of the body
Meaning

Literal meaning. That is, 'chop off his head'. It is now usually used humorously as a means of mildly reproaching someone.

Origin

Shakespeare used the phrase many times in his plays and I can find no record of any earlier usage; for example, in Henry VI Part III, 1592:

QUEEN MARGARET:
Off with his head, and set it on York gates;
So York may overlook the town of York.

Lewis Carroll became the best-known user of the phrase when he included it in Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, (published 1865), The Queen of Hearts shrieks the phrase several times in the story - in fact she doesn't say a great deal else:

The players all played at once without waiting for turns, quarrelling all the while, and fighting for the hedgehogs; and in a very short time the Queen was in a furious passion, and went stamping about, and shouting' Off with his head!' or 'Off with her head!' about once in a minute."

References to the meaning of the Queen of Hearts"
Grasping at straws here...

 

[Cardinal47]

I just cannot see your average professional (doctor, lawyer, CEO) working five days a week and living a in million-dollar home in Atlanta with another million-dollar home on Lake Oconee killing two elderly people over a weekend. The stakes had to be really high!

Think Russell Williams!

 

[Litig8ter]

I just cannot see your average professional (doctor, lawyer, CEO) working five days a week and living a in million-dollar home in Atlanta with another million-dollar home on Lake Oconee killing two elderly people over a weekend. The stakes had to be really high!

Stockbroker running a Ponzi scheme with a "return of investment with earnings" due on May 1? Or overdue? RD about to go to authorities?

 

[MotherOcean]

I just cannot see your average professional (doctor, lawyer, CEO) working five days a week and living a in million-dollar home in Atlanta with another million-dollar home on Lake Oconee killing two elderly people over a weekend. The stakes had to be really high!

I don't know. I read a couple of early reports which said that the value of the Dermond's home was in the middle... not the highest, not the lowest. I can imagine a fairly well-off professional of some sort with a home (and perhaps a family) in the city could have a second home on the lake, not necessarily at GW, that isn't a million-dollar home. But, you definitely have a point. I guess whether or not the stakes would be too high depends on what the motive was and to what degree mental illness could play into it.

 

[Treelights]

Sorry I didn't provide a link to verify. I will try to find one!

This is a verified link..
http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20140508/NEWS/140509736?p=2&tc=pg

 

[Bethanthony]

Wouldn't it make sense to have 2 then? I suspect their assets exceeded a million.

No, as a wealthy married couple, you want to have one trust. Here is a link that can explain the avoidance of double taxation better than I can

http://wills.about.com/od/overviewoftrusts/a/abtrust.htm