Gene Hackman dead at 95: Iconic actor and wife, 63, are found dead with their dog at Santa Fe home. #3

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #841
This article states that Betsy spoke with a doctor on the morning of Feb 12th, and made an appointment for herself for later that day, totally unrelated to the hantavirus or a respiratory issue, but she never showed up. I'm guessing her time of death is somewhere between the call and the appointment time, given that she appeared to be very reliable and responsible.

Hackman doctor claims wife called him 24hrs AFTER police say she died
 
  • #842
In my experience, a will has to specifically exclude immediate heirs if that is the intention. Lawyers do that so that a will cannot be contested and the deceased's wishes are very clear. (My mother excluded a daughter-in-law that way. My uncle excluded me that way.) If the chain of inheritance is murky, as it sounds like this one may be, or if the estate planning assumed BA would survive GH and she didn't, then the children have every right to pursue the estate legally, as immediate next of kin. I'm not a lawyer, jmho. -- as for why it should interest me, those poor dogs who may be in legal limbo!

The best way to not have a will be contested, is to leave a minimal amount to those you would ‘disinherit’.

In Canada, I’ve never heard of naming those who are to be disinherited. Perhaps adding a letter explaining why, in case it goes to court but that’s it. Explain the minimal inheritance.

No one is ‘entitled’ to the money or assets of the deceased, blood relative or not.
 
  • #843
I’m also impressed with the fact that when the couple married in 1991 there was no prenup. Obviously Gene was 100% confident in his choice of Betsy as a partner to share his life with for the rest of his years. despite his wealth. So different from many other Hollywood marriages.
It could also be an age thing. Pre-nups are a more recent thing, and I think the older generations (of normal, everyday, average citizens) would not have entertained the thought of protecting any assets. They married for love and expected it to be for life. Adding in the fact he was rich and famous might change things up, but I'm not shocked there wasn't a pre-nup. Turns out it wasn't needed anyway.
 
  • #844
This article states that Betsy spoke with a doctor on the morning of Feb 12th, and made an appointment for herself for later that day, totally unrelated to the hantavirus or a respiratory issue, but she never showed up. I'm guessing her time of death is somewhere between the call and the appointment time, given that she appeared to be very reliable and responsible.

Hackman doctor claims wife called him 24hrs AFTER police say she died
That’s odd since 2/11 was the last known day of life. Have they not checked her phone?
 
  • #845
That’s odd since 2/11 was the last known day of life. Have they not checked her phone?
I believe this is new, ,emerging information (RE: the doctor) so would supersede the 11th being the last known contact if in fact true. I assume phone records would prove or disprove this, but AFAIK, nothing has been mentioned about any findings from phone records, if they have been accessed as yet. It takes time and a lot of red tape to be able to access the info.
 
  • #846
That’s odd since 2/11 was the last known day of life. Have they not checked her phone?
No, at the press conference they had not yet been able to access the phones. They also didn't have results from the dog necropsy. I think they referred to those as loose ends. But they didn't seem to think that info would change their conclusions. They seemed to put a lot of faith in the unanswered email on the computer instead. Feb 11 was the last known date of life for BA based on what they had but the ME never said she died that day despite press headlines.
MOO
 
  • #847
I'm not a lawyer, jmho. -- as for why it should interest me, those poor dogs who may be in legal limbo!
RS&BBM
Indeed. My $0.02 on the matter of Wills and Trusts is a lesson learned here could be to include stipulations as to what should become of your pets when you die, including setting funds aside for their ongoing care and who they should be with. Pets of the deceased or incompetent too often end up in shelters with the risk of euthanasia.
 
  • #848
$$$ in Wills or Trusts for Pets?

Wasn't there a rich person who donated all their money to their dog or the SPCA ? Maybe Leona Helmsley?
snipped for focus @ttjo
Leona Helmsley "... died of congestive heart failure at the age of 87" in 2007..."
She left the bulk of her estate—estimated at more than $4 billion [ed: in 2007] —to the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust... "
Multi-million $ gift for her pet dog, and other similar $ gifts to two of her four g'chldren, while leaving zero to the other two.

A court ruling that Helmsley was mentally unfit when she executed her will resulted in waaaay different distributions. Sources in the wiki footnotes give more detail.


Now back to Gene Hackman &. Betsy Arakawa.
 
Last edited:
  • #849
I've thought a bit more about the phone call and appointment with the doctor that is meant to have occurred on the 12th. It seems that Gene may have been an existing patient at the clinic, and Betsy was going to her first appointment on the afternoon of the 12th, after rescheduling because Gene was unwell in the days prior. If only she'd been able to make that first appointment, her hantavirus may have been able to have been picked up. I'm sure the clinic was not to know that her being a no show is totally out of character, but imagine if they'd followed up with a welfare check after not getting a response to calling her? (NOT that I'm implying they did anything wrong) Another "if only"......

This clinic is not your average clinic, it offers "personalized concierge medicine", with hour long appointments, and a holistic approach. I would imagine a first appointment, especially of that length would include a BP check, listen to the heart and lungs etc and anything underlying could be picked up. A bit of a "sliding doors" moment. :-(

 
  • #850
RS&BBM
Indeed. My $0.02 on the matter of Wills and Trusts is a lesson learned here could be to include stipulations as to what should become of your pets when you die, including setting funds aside for their ongoing care and who they should be with. Pets of the deceased or incompetent too often end up in shelters with the risk of euthanasia.
I generally agree. Too often even if there are large numbers of surviving family members the pets of the deceased still go to shelters. It's heartbreaking. So things need to be planned. I don't think that info should necessarily be part of a Will though. I'm not an attorney but wonder if it could be some sort of "addendum" that could be more easily changed. Back in 2005 when these Wills were signed, they didn't own any of the dogs they owned when they died. And people who might be willing to be pet caretakers/adopters might have changes in life circumstances too. Or allergies develop or come to light-- dogs might ok but more recently acquired cats or birds not so ok.
MOO
 
  • #851
I generally agree. Too often even if there are large numbers of surviving family members the pets of the deceased still go to shelters. It's heartbreaking. So things need to be planned. I don't think that info should necessarily be part of a Will though. I'm not an attorney but wonder if it could be some sort of "addendum" that could be more easily changed. Back in 2005 when these Wills were signed, they didn't own any of the dogs they owned when they died. And people who might be willing to be pet caretakers/adopters might have changes in life circumstances too. Or allergies develop or come to light-- dogs might ok but more recently acquired cats or birds not so ok.
MOO
I'm not sure if it's legally binding, but I've made provisions for my dogs in my will. It's more to just have my wishes made known, but the person who will take them is on board with it.
 
  • #852
I'm not sure if it's legally binding, but I've made provisions for my dogs in my will. It's more to just have my wishes made known, but the person who will take them is on board with it.
Yes I'm not sure a Will can ever "force" a beneficiary to accept a bequest of any kind. My reasoning for not putting it in a Will though had more to do with needing to change the Will too often if things change for the original pet owner/Will writer or for the named beneficiary. And if competency issues arise, no one would want to make ANY changes. @al66pine's Leona Helmsley post a few posts back makes that clear!
MOO
 
  • #853
I’m also impressed with the fact that when the couple married in 1991 there was no prenup. Obviously Gene was 100% confident in his choice of Betsy as a partner to share his life with for the rest of his years. despite his wealth. So different from many other Hollywood marriages.
Here's what he said about his first marriage to Kevin Costner back in 1987 when shooting the movie "No Way Out.". Maybe he thought his ex-wife would leave the kids enough money, and since Betsy was their ages , he would leave her his money.


At the end of the day, he ran into Hackman in the parking lot as they were getting in their cars to go home, and the older actor called him over. Costner thought he was about to get berated for holding up the production and being disrespectful to the director, but instead, Hackman said something he would never forget.

“You know, I watched you today,” Costner remembered him saying, “And I went through a divorce about three years ago, and I’ve been doing a lot of shitty movies trying to pay for this divorce. And I didn’t feel about acting the way I felt for a long time… I watched you today — I used to feel like that. I was really happy to see you do that.”
 
  • #854
this gets a bit confusing....stating with the me who looked liked she was coerced////its all wrong somehow...just a thought


Mystery grew over the death of Gene Hackman's wife Betsy last night after a doctor revealed she had called his private clinic 24 hours after police claim she died.

this from the daily mail
 
  • #855
this gets a bit confusing....stating with the me who looked liked she was coerced////its all wrong somehow...just a thought


Mystery grew over the death of Gene Hackman's wife Betsy last night after a doctor revealed she had called his private clinic 24 hours after police claim she died.

this from the daily mail
But police never said she died on the 11th no matter what the MSM said. The 11th was the last day they had proof she was alive ** without the phone records.** The ME said specifically at the press conference she couldn't say if she died on the 11th.
MOO
 
  • #856
 
  • #857
But police never said she died on the 11th no matter what the MSM said. The 11th was the last day they had proof she was alive ** without the phone records.** The ME said specifically at the press conference she couldn't say if she died on the 11th.
MOO
Thank you so much for this. Language matters. The NM LE seemed very careful with their language and report. — I assume the new doctor speaking up chimed in after the report. Seems odd he wouldn’t have volunteered info to LE immediately when news broke. Maybe too busy or BA’s calls lost in the shuffle. Also odd he went to a tabloid, imho, if he’s a concierge doctor to the rich.
 
  • #858
But police never said she died on the 11th no matter what the MSM said. The 11th was the last day they had proof she was alive ** without the phone records.** The ME said specifically at the press conference she couldn't say if she died on the 11th.
MOO
Thank you.

Of course LE is trying to narrow the boundaries in order to make the best possible determination of when BA died.

When LE said the 11th was "the last time she was known to be alive", that was them putting the boundary on the EARLIEST she could possibly have died.

At the time the bodies were found, the LATEST she could possibly have died would have started by being "moments before the bodies were found."

Then when the ME determined that she had been dead for some minimum amount of time, (ie based on degree of decomposition), the latest she could have been alive would have been moved back from date found to whatever was a safe assumption based on the ME's findings. My guess is they would have put that at around the 17th/18th.

Then they would look at the surroundings in the house, including GH and his condition, and any obvious evidence at the house such as notations on calendars or journals, etc, the condition of any food, or waste, or trash, the dogs and any food/water supply for them, etc etc. and make further adjustments to their best estimate.

I believe that's what the status was at the time of the press conference. So they said what they knew at the time. I don't think they had gotten access to the data and activity logs from the phones at that point.

So as they get more data such as from the phones, and information such as others coming forward to report attempts to contact, they will continue to narrow their estimate of her time of death.

Of course we may feel we "know" but the official process will be looking for actual evidence before making their assumptions into a final report estimate.

MOO and more MOO
 
  • #859
Yes, it's similar to when a murder victim is described as having died "between date X and date Y". Date X being the day before they were last seen alive and date Y being the day after the body was found.
This often confuses people. The crucial word is "between".
 
  • #860
In Canada, I’ve never heard of naming those who are to be disinherited.
It does happen in the US. Check out Jerry Lewis’s will for an interesting read.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Guardians Monthly Goal

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
98
Guests online
1,620
Total visitors
1,718

Forum statistics

Threads
638,565
Messages
18,730,946
Members
244,484
Latest member
jg13027
Back
Top