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

Status
Not open for further replies.
BBM-what a curious statement. I wonder if Mrs Harrod concurs.

That line stood out to me as well. My first thought on reading that line was - how interesting that someone would feel a need to state that.
 
That line stood out to me as well. My first thought on reading that line was - how interesting that someone would feel a need to state that.

I'll say it...I can definitely see them opening up the boxes. JMHO
 
A few posts from Bob’s daughters from 3 years ago (Aug 11 & 12, 2009), a little over 2 weeks after their father had gone missing. PB and RB on one forum, and JuM on another.

PB: I called my dad that morning by telephone, he had obviously been getting quite a few phone calls that morning. Then I realized that my BIL was there and I DID hear him say he was going to the "hardware store". My dad responded to him in a favorable way. I told my dad that I would let him go and talk to him later. That was the last time that I spoke to him. Times vary as I could not tell you the exact time that I called Dad, I gave an approximate of sometime between 11 and 12 and found later it was probably after 11:30 a.m.

PB: The changing of the locks was my suggestion as I was concerned to F's safety from the POI.

JuM: His new wife has changed all the locks, so if he tries to return he will not be able to get back in with his keys.

RB: The "possible" crime scene and it's contents have constantly been at risk, and that must change. Proposed conservators and our attorney are increasingly concerned.

RB: Real Quick: D continued to "loan" POI money, even after he married F. What a snake (either D and/or POI)!

PB: He has called me at home exactly two times this year, one from his home phone and one from a cell phone that the POI had given him. The only other time was about 2 to 3 years ago, when my Mom was really sick. He does NOT have long-distance and was too cheap to pay for it.

PB: The POI did give him the cell phone, but he did NOT know how to answer it - chuckle.

RB: POI insinuating that family (actual family) is involved. Jeesh! POI doesn't really know family and only had D's chronic lies to base her opinion on.
 
A few posts from Bob’s daughters from 3 years ago (Aug 11 & 12, 2009), a little over 2 weeks after their father had gone missing. PB and RB on one forum, and JuM on another.

PB: I called my dad that morning by telephone, he had obviously been getting quite a few phone calls that morning. Then I realized that my BIL was there and I DID hear him say he was going to the "hardware store". My dad responded to him in a favorable way. I told my dad that I would let him go and talk to him later. That was the last time that I spoke to him. Times vary as I could not tell you the exact time that I called Dad, I gave an approximate of sometime between 11 and 12 and found later it was probably after 11:30 a.m.

PB: The changing of the locks was my suggestion as I was concerned to F's safety from the POI.

JuM: His new wife has changed all the locks, so if he tries to return he will not be able to get back in with his keys.

RB: The "possible" crime scene and it's contents have constantly been at risk, and that must change. Proposed conservators and our attorney are increasingly concerned.

RB: Real Quick: D continued to "loan" POI money, even after he married F. What a snake (either D and/or POI)!

PB: He has called me at home exactly two times this year, one from his home phone and one from a cell phone that the POI had given him. The only other time was about 2 to 3 years ago, when my Mom was really sick. He does NOT have long-distance and was too cheap to pay for it.

PB: The POI did give him the cell phone, but he did NOT know how to answer it - chuckle.

RB: POI insinuating that family (actual family) is involved. Jeesh! POI doesn't really know family and only had D's chronic lies to base her opinion on.

Well I guess that somewhat derails the outrage of one of the co conservators and the one daughter who is NOT a co conservator regarding the changing of the locks.

Dont these women speak to one another or is everyone forgetting the story here? They need to review at least the first month or perhaps the first year on all of their internet posting.

I suppose we could do a spread sheet for them. ;)
 
PB: The POI did give him the cell phone, but he did NOT know how to answer it - chuckle.

OK- so Bob apparently had a cell phone he couldnt use. Moving on....

These folks are pretty strange.
 
OK- so Bob apparently had a cell phone he couldnt use. Moving on....

These folks are pretty strange.

Yeah, I remember reading that and thinking- huh. I wouldn't think it was funny at all if my elderly father had a cell phone that he didn't or couldn't use.

Maybe I just didn't get the joke.
 
Yeah, I remember reading that and thinking- huh. I wouldn't think it was funny at all if my elderly father had a cell phone that he didn't or couldn't use.

Maybe I just didn't get the joke.

Yes, but it is likely you dont want your elderly father isolated either. It seems clear to me that all of the posting that includes disgusting allegations, insensitive remarks such as the one about the phone and repeated calls to APS indicate a coordinated effort to keep Bob away from any possible attachment to another human being. JMO.

Mrs Harrod and by extension her family must have seemed like a God send to him. So sad. I wonder what Bob would have done if he hadn't disappeared? I wonder if he would have left everyone in CA in the dust?

Where are you Bob? There are still people across the www fighting for you.
 
RB: The "possible" crime scene and it's contents have constantly been at risk, and that must change. Proposed conservators and our attorney are increasingly concerned.

Moving on to this statement. A reference to Carnation Drive as the crime scene....I knew we would all see eye to eye eventually. Crime scene certainly implies that a crime was committed.
 
In 2 more years Bob can be declared dead and his estate administered. The future petitioners (AKA daughters) will have met the requirements for a search/inquiry. Color/bold by me.

California Probate Code – Section 12400-12408

12401. In proceedings under this part, a person who has not been
seen or heard from for a continuous period of five years by those who
are likely to have seen or heard from that person, and whose absence
is not satisfactorily explained after diligent search or inquiry, is
presumed to be dead. The person's death is presumed to have occurred
at the end of the period unless there is sufficient evidence to
establish that death occurred earlier.

12402. Subject to the provisions of this part, the estate of a
missing person may be administered in the manner provided generally
for the administration of estates of deceased persons.

[snipped]

12406. (a) At the hearing, the court shall determine whether the
alleged missing person is a person who is presumed to be dead under
Section 12401. The court may receive evidence and consider the
affidavits and depositions of persons likely to have seen or heard
from or know the whereabouts of the alleged missing person.
(b) If the court is not satisfied that a diligent search or
inquiry has been made for the missing person, the court may order the
petitioner to conduct a diligent search or inquiry and to report the
results. The court may order the search or inquiry to be made in any
manner that the court determines to be advisable, including any or
all of the following methods:
(1) Inserting in one or more suitable newspapers or other
periodicals a notice requesting information from any person having
knowledge of the whereabouts of the missing person.
(2) Notifying law enforcement officials and public welfare
agencies in appropriate locations of the disappearance of the missing
person.
(3) Engaging the services of an investigator.
(c) The costs of a search ordered by the court pursuant to
subdivision (b) shall be paid by the estate of the missing person,
but if there is no administration, the court in its discretion may
order the petitioner to pay the costs.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=prob&group=12001-13000&file=12400-12408
 
Ah ha-now it all falls into place....that is why the reward was offered so late after the fact. They seem to be missing something-

c) The costs of a search ordered by the court pursuant to
subdivision (b) shall be paid by the estate of the missing person,
but if there is no administration, the court in its discretion may
order the petitioner to pay the costs.
 
I posted in the PL SAR thread, but figured I'd throw it up here for discussion also. What do ya'll think about Crestline, and stops along the way if you were traveling from Placentia to Crestline? The timing works.
 
I posted in the PL SAR thread, but figured I'd throw it up here for discussion also. What do ya'll think about Crestline, and stops along the way if you were traveling from Placentia to Crestline? The timing works.

It totally works. It even makes good sense. Assuming that Bob didnt walk out of his house, we are back to whether or not this event was planned or unplanned.

So, was the person who drove away with Bob in a complete panic and just looking for a remote spot or had the spot already been planned? That clearly impacts how far into the area the perp would have pushed.

I think there was panic-there was clearly some kind of damage that occurred since there were things repaired.
 
It totally works. It even makes good sense. Assuming that Bob didnt walk out of his house, we are back to whether or not this event was planned or unplanned.

So, was the person who drove away with Bob in a complete panic and just looking for a remote spot or had the spot already been planned? That clearly impacts how far into the area the perp would have pushed.

I think there was panic-there was clearly some kind of damage that occurred since there were things repaired.


ITA about the panic.

I personally think that what happened to Bob was sort of the inverse equation to premeditated murder, if that makes any sense.
Someone(s) wanted him gone in their head(s) but then he was- in a moment of...something? and that's a bit haunting to those person(s).

Anyway- I think in terms of possible location there is a combo effect going on- unplanned and frantic (so, closer and familiar) and at the same time the premeditation of the mind, which is farther out and a lot more specific.

Oriah, retreating to the SAR thread...
 
Anyway- I think in terms of possible location there is a combo effect going on- unplanned and frantic (so, closer and familiar) and at the same time the premeditation of the mind, which is farther out and a lot more specific.

I have been pondering this-perhaps it is a combination driven by at least two people. The hands on perp and the person who called the shots. The person who killed Bob clearly wasnt a professional or accomplished at it.
 
How about a hypothetical here-

You have a ridgeline which might have had some evidence in it at some point. You cant get rid of it probably-I mean the VIN number might be flagged I would think. So, if you are so overwhelmed by the events of 7/27/09 that you cant even go into the house any more...what do you do about driving that vehicle?

Do you give it to your wife to drive? I suppose you could just leave it sitting around...

Maybe your loving son gives you a vehicle to drive. After all, he seems to be doing very well for himself in the last three years or so.

I wonder how many gallons of bleach it takes to wash that trunk-like area in a Ridgeline to the point where it feels... safe. For some definition of the word safe.

I'd love to see what condition the trunk-like area of that truck looks like. And whether it smells of bleach.
 
I am still confused as to why Bob's assets arent essentially frozen until he returns or is declared dead, or both.

Go back to Gitana's post about conservatorships. She cited some links that were most informative, if totally hair raising.

The phrase "kangaroo courts" comes to mind.
 
OK- so Bob apparently had a cell phone he couldnt use. Moving on....

These folks are pretty strange.

Waitasec. I'm reasonably sure that the "POI" referred to was the BL.

Makes me wonder if it was a pre-paid phone or did she get a contract on it? If she had a contract, then would it be possible to argue that she owns that phone? As in, owns the data from that phone?

Nah, too easy.
 
Thank You Websleuths ADMIN for making Bob the Spotlight Case!!!!!!!!!!!!

:blowkiss:

This is a nice lead in to all the activity about to come from Disappeared pre-show publicity.

And what a great jumping off point for the other networks that are becoming interested in this story.
 
Waitasec. I'm reasonably sure that the "POI" referred to was the BL.

Makes me wonder if it was a pre-paid phone or did she get a contract on it? If she had a contract, then would it be possible to argue that she owns that phone? As in, owns the data from that phone?

Nah, too easy.

Probably would be a huge disappointment to the co conservators if it was a contract phone and PPD had the records which clearly didnt impact their decision to clear BL.

I have no inside information regarding this, but it is a very reasonable guess given that she and her family were cleared.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
114
Guests online
944
Total visitors
1,058

Forum statistics

Threads
589,930
Messages
17,927,798
Members
228,004
Latest member
CarpSleuth
Back
Top