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.
  • #921
It didn't sound like it to me.

From the ABC news article:
Arakawa, who wasn't an established patient, told Cloudberry she was "feeling congested," but she "didn't sound ill," according to Dr. Josiah Child, founder of Cloudberry Health.

Arakawa asked about hyperbaric therapy -- which involves breathing pure oxygen in a pressurized chamber -- and "they told her she should come in to discuss," Child said.


She made an appointment earlier though, which she rang and cancelled because she said Gene wasn't well. My thought was that this earlier appointment might have been for something else.
 
  • #922
IMO I don’t think they had much to do with their father for quite some time.
Gene’s Will speaks volumes and it was written 20 years ago. There’s a reason he didn’t include them in his Will.
But we don't know what that reason was. They might benefit in some way through the trusts, or he may have settled money on them years earlier.
 
  • #923
$$$ in Wills or Trusts for Pets?


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.
"Trouble" passed in 2011. He was awarded 2M by the presiding judge. I wonder how he spend the 2M in 4 years? Yes, back to Gene and Betsy.
 
  • #924
But we don't know what that reason was. They might benefit in some way through the trusts, or he may have settled money on them years earlier.
I feel like this all has to do with the simultaneous death law in NM. They have to have died within 120 hours of each other in order to consider the deaths being “at the same time”. I assume that plays into wills and inheritances and the best way to fight them legally.
 
  • #925
I feel like this all has to do with the simultaneous death law in NM. They have to have died within 120 hours of each other in order to consider the deaths being “at the same time”. I assume that plays into wills and inheritances and the best way to fight them legally.
Didn't BA have a clause in her will that said if they die within so many days of each other it would be considered simultaneous? Don't remember hearing about a clause like that in Gene's will.

The problem with Gene passing after Betsy is Gene gave everything to Betsy who had already passed at the time of his passing. What happens in that situation???

As I said earlier, I can see this becoming a big mess.

ETA: According to article this is what BA has regarding simultaneous death "No person will be deemed to have survived me if the person dies within 90 days of my death."

JMO
 
Last edited:
  • #926
She made an appointment earlier though, which she rang and cancelled because she said Gene wasn't well.
I was under the impression that that appointment was for Gene and then she called on the 12th for her own appointment. MOO.

In other news, Bear and Akita - the surviving dogs, have found new homes - one out of state and one local. Signed off by the estate lawyer.
 
  • #927
I was under the impression that that appointment was for Gene and then she called on the 12th for her own appointment. MOO.

In other news, Bear and Akita - the surviving dogs, have found new homes - one out of state and one local. Signed off by the estate lawyer.
I would hope my kids would take my dogs if I were to pass. I know there is nothing in my will about my pets but I'm almost certain without question the dogs would stay in the family. Perhaps I should change up the will to say take the dogs or get nothing.

JMO
 
  • #928
I would hope my kids would take my dogs if I were to pass. I know there is nothing in my will about my pets but I'm almost certain without question the dogs would stay in the family. Perhaps I should change up the will to say take the dogs or get nothing.

JMO
I agree with this.
Lesson learned on this - make provisions for pets and pet care in your will.
 
  • #929
In other news, Bear and Akita - the surviving dogs, have found new homes - one out of state and one local. Signed off by the estate lawyer.
They split the dogs up ! I didn't expect that.
1742323561500.webp


I subscribe to the UK charity Dogs Trust. One of the benefits of being a supporter is that they will take your dog in and rehome it if you die, if there is nobody else to do so. They do not euthanise healthy dogs.
 
  • #930
I was under the impression that that appointment was for Gene and then she called on the 12th for her own appointment. MOO.

No, it was for herself according to reports. Not that we can trust the accuracy of any of the media.
Dr. Child said Ms. Arakawa, who had not been a patient of the clinic’s before, had initially scheduled an appointment for Feb. 12, then canceled it two days before, saying that she needed to take care of her husband. The clinic rescheduled the appointment after Ms. Arakawa called again that morning, he said.
"She made an appointment for herself for February 12. It was for something unrelated to anything respiratory," Dr. Child explained. He also noted that Betsy had canceled the appointment just days earlier, citing her husband’s declining health.
 
  • #931
I subscribe to the UK charity Dogs Trust. One of the benefits of being a supporter is that they will take your dog in and rehome it if you die, if there is nobody else to do so. They do not euthanise healthy dogs.
Oh I LOVE that! That's a great benefit.

No, it was for herself according to reports. Not that we can trust the accuracy of any of the media.
Thank you. I was confused on the order of events.
 
  • #932
The media is who I was referring to. They were looking for media sensation when in fact they do not have the conclusive evidence from the phone.

They also made a statement about the daughter being in touch with her father, that he was doing well and doing Pilates and Yoga several times a week. If the daughter did give that info we know now that it contradicts what the doctors and ME said. The press though published it with their spin on it, not knowing the facts.

It’s the frustrating way of the world from the media establishment.

Thank you for clarifying. The errors in reporting are getting to be so routine that I hardly believe anything I read any more. That issue is compounded by some media outlets which rely on other media reporting as their news source. One gets it’s wrong and it goes on and on.

As in the case of the daughter I do wonder what question she was asked because the media has a habit of only quoting the answer, sometimes only partially quoting it. For example she might’ve been asked “the last time you saw your father, how was he?”. Her “Well last summer was the last time I was able to go out there <cut!>…………but>>” Manipulating or out of context quoting is one reason people often refuse to talk at all. Nobody wants to publicly appear uncaring and out of touch. It’s becoming obvious that some media relishes in presenting the worst side of people (so we, the common folk, can look down on them and feel better about our own shortcomings? Maybe.) I fear ‘good taste’ and common courtesy in news reporting has become a thing of the past.


JMO
 
  • #933
Does anyone else think the phone records are taking a while to come back? I cannot figure out why they would take so long, they had a warrant. Everything else in the case is out.
Also a bit strange it took the doctor so long to come forward about the call from Betsy on the 12th. Unless he was just unaware and authorities are looking through the phone. I dunno. have never heard phones take this long
 
  • #934
The media always has an axe to grind and cannot be trusted.
Some media can be trusted. It's important to read and discern for yourself. At least a few media sources (ie NYT) reported the Santa Fe press conference accurately. -- And if a person is quoted there is a good chance it is correct. Otherwise the outlet can be sued. That's why I trusted what Dr Childs said in the otherwise suspect DM.
 
  • #935
Does anyone else think the phone records are taking a while to come back? I cannot figure out why they would take so long, they had a warrant. Everything else in the case is out.
Also a bit strange it took the doctor so long to come forward about the call from Betsy on the 12th. Unless he was just unaware and authorities are looking through the phone. I dunno. have never heard phones take this long

The temporary restraining order was granted and encompasses “death investigation reports” so I wouldn’t expect the Sherrif’s Office or ME can release any more details until the matter is resolved. As for my own opinion, I think we know enough details as it is so maybe this will be all? The public knows where and what caused their deaths, does it really matter so much as to when or what phone calls took place?

This might be the reason the doctor came forward, adding to the timeline and washing out the Feb 11th mistake in the date of death of Betsy. JMO

“….Additionally, the order temporarily prevents the disclosure of autopsy reports or death investigation reports for Hackman and Arakawa…..

….A court hearing to discuss the temporary order is set for March 31.…

…..The petition argued that the order was necessary to protect the late couple's "right to privacy," saying that "during their lifetime, the Hackmans placed significant value on their privacy and took affirmative, vigilant steps to safeguard their privacy," according to NBC News and People magazine.”
 
  • #936
Does anyone else think the phone records are taking a while to come back? I cannot figure out why they would take so long, they had a warrant. Everything else in the case is out.
Also a bit strange it took the doctor so long to come forward about the call from Betsy on the 12th. Unless he was just unaware and authorities are looking through the phone. I dunno. have never heard phones take this long
The BBC reports that cellphone data is what alerted the Sheriff's office to calls to Cloudberry Clinic. (I can't find a copy of the Sheriff's Department update but it's been reported numerous places.) So it seems the cellphone data has been analyzed.

 
  • #937
 
  • #938
For all we know Cloudberry did contact LE to tell them about the appointments and phone call on 2/12, but LE didn't make that information public until they had the cell phone data because they wanted to verify the calls using the actual cell phone data.

Would really make LE look like buffoons if they had just come out and said this clinic has said BA had called them on the 12th, therefor she must have been alive until that date, before corroborating that with the actual records.

I would think LE would have known a lot of information about who BA called early on just by looking at the call log on the phones prior to receiving the actual records from the phone company.

JMO
BBM:
Sharp thinking.
Thanks!
 
  • #939
  • #940
Did you know supporting DNASolves.com with a subscription or donation helps solve crime and keeps Websleuths free for everyone? If you enjoy Websleuths, along with the fact no more insufferable ads, we ask that you become a monthly subscriber to DNASolves.com. If you can't make a monthly donation, please pick a case that needs funding and donate once. We know not everyone can donate. So if you could please get the word out about DNASolves.com through your social media or by simply emailing your friends, we would really appreciate it.
If you have any questions, please
CLICK HERE!
Thank you,
Tricia
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
103
Guests online
2,670
Total visitors
2,773

Forum statistics

Threads
632,543
Messages
18,628,253
Members
243,192
Latest member
Mcornillie5484
Back
Top