CA CA - Bob Harrod, 81, Orange County, 27 July 2009 - # 9

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I really want to know more about those emails.
 
believe09 said:
No offense to Ms Kemp, but talk about being out of her league. In any case, I think she did her job and it will be up to future proceedings to see if she did it well. I mean, this depo was shades of FICA for me, lol.
Click to expand...

This case is reminding me of Dee Dee Moore. Alot of fraud and straw lending was going on. Which I also suspect in this case. And of course that leads to motive to disappear someone when they are about to discover the truth. WS received accolades from LE for pouring through the docs and public records. It saved LE from having to get search warrants and going on a fishing expedition for some of the financial records. It's hard to believe we can go places easier and do it legally where LE has their hands tied. It was done right in front of Dee Dee and there wasn't a damned thing she could do about it either.

Hopefully we can pour through everything and end up with the same results in this case.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=104804&highlight=dee+moore
 
SuziQ said:
This case is reminding me of Dee Dee Moore. Alot of fraud and straw lending was going on. Which I also suspect in this case. And of course that leads to motive to disappear someone when they are about to discover the truth. WS received accolades from LE for pouring through the docs and public records. It saved LE from having to get search warrants and going on a fishing expedition for some of the financial records. It's hard to believe we can go places easier and do it legally where LE has their hands tied. It was done right in front of Dee Dee and there wasn't a damned thing she could do about it either.

Hopefully we can pour through everything and end up with the same results in this case.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=104804&highlight=dee+moore
Click to expand...

Thank you, Suzi and you are absolutely right. One of the points I always try and make with LE is that we have access to thousands of volunteers who can dig out this stuff, saving a good deal of effort on the part of cash strapped departments.

They are always grateful. Always.
 
I'm still floored that Andrew stated his loan was to be forgiven upon his grandfathers death, thus the reason he stopped making payments in August of 2009.

It's terrible to think 5 people likely know, but are sitting back likely thinking prove it, prove it in a court of law. :( :sigh:
 
yes, that statement by AH about it being his understanding that the loan would be forgiven "at my grandfather's - - -" thing was just something wasn't it. He almost said it, he stopped just short but it was completely obvious where that sentence was headed. Then he realized that would beg the question "so you must have had reason to believe, even back then, right after his disappearance, that your grandfather was dead"
 
He actually said it. He didn't refrain the first time. He tried to retract it later......

I'll have to find it again....
 
I saw that he said he would be forgiven the debt upon his grandfather's death later on in the dep, but what struck me most was the point where he stopped himself from saying that.

In reading that portion, I had an image of him in my head clapping his hand over his mouth literally to try and stop the final words from flying out of his mouth.
 
I noticed both too.

He says the word death at page 50 line 19.

I don't recall exactly where it was he caught himself mid sentence earlier in the deposition....

but it is clear to me, in no uncertain terms, Andrew knows his grandfather is deceased. And that he knew so in August of 2009.
 
Cubby said:
I noticed both too.

He says the word death at page 50 line 19.

I don't recall exactly where it was he caught himself mid sentence earlier in the deposition....

but it is clear to me, in no uncertain terms, Andrew knows his grandfather is deceased. And that he knew so in August of 2009.
Click to expand...

his responses in the dep would certainly strongly suggest knowledge of that, agreed.
 
tlcox said:
yes, that statement by AH about it being his understanding that the loan would be forgiven "at my grandfather's - - -" thing was just something wasn't it. He almost said it, he stopped just short but it was completely obvious where that sentence was headed. Then he realized that would beg the question "so you must have had reason to believe, even back then, right after his disappearance, that your grandfather was dead"
Click to expand...

Actually, if I am reading the depo correctly-(this is the section dealing with the phone calls from AH to EA for advice)

EA: Do you recall telling me in the course of that conversation that your aunts as trustees were doing things that didnt sit well with you?

AH: Yes

EA: What did you mean by that?

AH: I meant that I didnt believe they were following through on the intentions my grandfather had.

EA: What is your understanding of the intentions your grandfather had?

AH: That my note was to be forgiven upon his death or...

EA: (follow up question)
 
This is not funny, but it must have been hard to avoid sarcasm...I mean Andrew, your loan was to be forgiven upon his death or....disappearance? Is that where you were going with this?
 
I have just reread. Early on in the dep, around page 15 the topic first came up but was not answered as the attys were wrangling over the relevance of the questions.

Then on page 50 attorney A. manages to lead the questions back to that topic in a way that was harder for attorney K. to object to. Enter the admission that AH thought the loan was to be forgiven upon the death of his grandfather.

Again, to have been a fly on the wall during this dep.
 
As to the follow up, it had to do with AH telling EA he was angry that his aunts quit their jobs after being appointed....apparently this was during the same phone call.
 
believe09 said:
As to the follow up, it had to do with AH telling EA he was angry that his aunts quit their jobs after being appointed....apparently this was during the same phone call.
Click to expand...


What exactly did Andrew have to be angry about? He stopped making payments long before his aunts were appointed.

He was clearly angry his Aunts were trying to collect. Thing is, if he didn't know where to make the payments because his grandfather was missing and he was unsure of Mrs. Harrod, then he should have opened a seperate account and made payments on the deed to that account. Instead he did nothing. He alleges he made payments which he commingled with his general account.

This clearly tells me it is very likely Mr. Harrods remarriage was the catalyst for his disappearance. For any number of reasons which could range from greed, or the need to cover up something more nefarious, some illegal fraud with regards to Mr. Harrods funds.


It amazes me no arrests have been made. Yet at the same time, there are 5 players here which I assume LE would want to arrest and charge at the same time. I guess time will tell how LE's hand unfolds.
 
now there is a lot of work being done around the trial minutes from the October 31, 2011 trial. The depo was big, but the trial minutes are bigger.

A warm thank you fwiw to the folks who have scrambled to obtain the court docs we are digging into.

In these minutes, there is a cross of PB by her own atty, IS, in regards to the demands for payment from AH.

IS: After you were appointed as the trustee, did you demand payment from Mr. Harrod?

PB: Yes.

IS: And what was the result of that demand?

PB: No response-

IS: Did Mr. Harrod--

PB: He did not want to make payment as he was promised by his grandfather, my father, that they had an understanding, so to speak. That after his--that he was no longer here, that his house would be free and clear.
Click to expand...
OK, we have a similar exchange, imo, to AH's only at least AH was being deposed by the opposing atty lol.

"That after his--that he was no longer here, that his house would be free and clear."

Again, I have to ask, did this refer to the possibility that Bob would disappear??

Come on. We know what they are saying. Andrew claims Bob's death would absolve him of his responsibility. Andrew decided to stop paying a week or so after Bob disappeared.

That certainly points to Andrew knowing something had happened.
 
very similar exchange, and too funny that this testimony was elicited by the atty for the trustees. So Ah stops making payments even tho when the next payment came due it was a mere two weeks after his grandfather disappeared, based on the fact that his grandfather would not mind as he was going to forgive the debt on his death.

The trustee PB acknowledges that AH held the position that his grandfather would forgive the debt upon his death, only she alters it to soften the implication by saying "That after his--that he was no longer here, that his house would be free and clear."
 
The purpose of the trial on 10/31/2011 was to impeach the co conservators. One of the arguments to appoint a third party TTEE was because every single bill and expense was paid for out of the Survivors Trust. Including PB's gardener, mind you. Including repairs JeM (I kid you not) allegedly made to the houses on Carnation Dr, Windflower and PB's home. The PI was paid for out of the Survivors Trust, and apparently the PI told EA he was the co conservators bodyguard. The co conservators legal fees were paid out of the Survivors Trust.

I think my favorite expense was the hotel room hired by JuM so that she, PB and RB could meet with the PI. Um ok. The rationale was that he was allergic to cats and everyone had them.

At a mediation hearing on the previous Friday, according to the sworn testimony in the trial, the co conservators agreed to fix all of that stuff. To pay the Survivors Trust back. Even for the bodyguard I guess.

Another thing you will learn when we can get the minutes posted is that on July 30, 2009, AH, PB, RB and JuM went to meet with Fontelle and her daughter at Carnation Dr. AH told her that they had hired and atty and that they were advised to throw her *advertiser censored** out on the street. AH apparently did all of the talking. Also, apparently, JuM emptied out a jt bank account that she was on with Bob and Georgia. She bounced checks because she cleaned it out. I find that interesting as well fwiw.

The request for a third party was denied, incidentally. The judge's tentative was that he didnt see anything egregious. He saw warts and mistakes. I see them too.
 
Well given all of the above, it would be interesting to see if the long awaited accounting reflects a payback of those questionable monies to the survivor trust. What do you think, should I hold my breath?

I must say, things must be very very different in the state of CA. This bs with the delays in ponying up the accounting would never be tolerated here. At most a matter might wait two years for an accounting to be done, and only then if nobody is contentious or screaming for one.

It is a matter of course for the current accounting report to be performed each and every year. More often if requested by one of the parties or in a very contentious matter.
 
None of that surprises me. Looking forward to reading when the minutes are posted!

Poor Bob's been looted, by his own flesh and blood. :(
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 190 more.
Total: 1,570 (members: 191, guests: 1,379)

Online statistics

Members online
191
Guests online
1,379
Total visitors
1,570
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,802
Messages
17,959,143
Members
228,607
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top