Billie texts Clint about trading custody for house

[Soulmagent]

If BJD is not living in the house;
If Clint has no where to live;
If the house was given to Clint;

Why can't Clint be given his house back thru a divorce? Why can't he use his leverage against BJD; he's not named as a POI...

It's already been re-decorated..

JMO

This issue needs to go into the myth buster thread. I believe this is not the house that was left to clint. That house had a different address and I dont know what had happened
The house at 1808 is in both of their names bought 1991 and I am not sure of Texas Law but if he cannot prove he helped pay for it then he might not hve claim legally to get it in the divorce. I dont know about Texas law but in my state you only get out what you put in and if he worked under the table he may not want to push the platter from the table.

He would be better off in obtaining the house if she was arrested in connection of Haileys disapearances. Again My opinoin only but all the house information is in the threads somewhere.

 

[LisaB]

this issue needs to go into the myth buster thread. I believe this is not the house that was left to clint. That house had a different address and i dont know what had happened
the house at 1808 is in both of their names bought 1991 ...snip...

1804.

 

[ThoughtFox]

The house at 1808 is in both of their names bought 1991 and I am not sure of Texas Law but if he cannot prove he helped pay for it then he might not hve claim legally to get it in the divorce. I dont know about Texas law but in my state you only get out what you put in and if he worked under the table he may not want to push the platter from the table.

If the house belonged to him first then became communal property (with a deed in both their names) or if the house was in both their names from the beginning, then it doesn't matter who paid the payments. That deed is binding until they file a new deed, in my opinion.

In most states marriage gives partners equal share of property no matter how much each person contributed. It's implied in the partnership. When we bought our house 20 years ago both our names had to be on the deed by law because it's considered common property.

Here is something from a Law Office website in Dallas Texas:

http://www.raggiolaw.com/txart05.html

Community property consists of the property, other than separate property, acquired by either spouse during marriage. This is true even if only one spouse has possession of the property. Just because one spouse is named on the title, deed, or account; one person receives the asset as payment for personal services (ie: salary); or the asset will not be paid until a future date (ie: retirement) do not make it separate property. There is a presumption that all property possessed by either spouse is community property. Separate property ownership must be proven by clear and convincing evidence.

I don't think BD has a legal leg to stand on with this "deal" of hers. In fact, if Clint didn't have a good claim as part-owner of the house, why would she offer to make a deal at all?

 

[Soulmagent]

If the house belonged to him first then became communal property (with a deed in both their names) or if the house was in both their names from the beginning, then it doesn't matter who paid the payments. That deed is binding until they file a new deed, in my opinion.

In most states marriage gives partners equal share of property no matter how much each person contributed. It's implied in the partnership. When we bought our house 20 years ago both our names had to be on the deed by law because it's considered common property.

Here is something from a Law Office website in Dallas Texas:

http://www.raggiolaw.com/txart05.html





I don't think BD has a legal leg to stand on with this "deal" of hers. In fact, if Clint didn't have a good claim as part-owner of the house, why would she offer to make a deal at all?

I think it is an issue for the lawyer thread but I can see where i could be possible Clint not be entitled to the house.

In VA things are different you do not get back more then you put in. More states are adopting these property splits. They will even assign an salary to SAHMs.

Either way this is not the same address of the house Clint mentioned before
Why was he miseading about that?

 

[swedie]

Well if it is Clint's and Billie's house, but she has now moved in with her mom for whatever reason (probably cannot afford to pay the bills coming in), then by all means Clint should be able to live there. At least it's a roof over his family's head kwim. I don't know if these people think along the same lines as typical people kwim. He probably can't afford to pay the bills either so...You and I would not want to live there but I don't think they think that way. Just another place to hang your hat, sit on the couch and have a beer and smoke.

I know I'm not on the proper thread for this but that one is closed for now. Just wanted to put my :twocents: in about BD's next "maybe" last appearance. I think it's so far off in the future because she has a lot of lines to read and practicing to do. Sorry Gram, I was gone all day and missed that thread. I'll be good now. :blowkiss: Heading to the corner now.

 

[impatientredhead]

Sorry for pulling old topics back to the top. I am catching up on the details in this case. Followed closely in the beginning but dropped out for awhile. The whole mess makes me so sad for Hailey and those who love her.

The first thing that comes to mind w/ith this particular items is WHAT else was Billie willing to trade her children for? Attention? The adoration of a predator? That speaks directly to how you view your child, as a commodity, and how that worth can be leveraged to you.

With all the video and camera issues, the mutual interest in killers/violence/horror for entertainment and enjoyment, the complete lack of boundaries and willingness to do anything to keep a man's attention this case reminds me more and more of Karla Homolka.

With xmas having just occurred I have the vision of Karla giving her little sister (15 years old) to her predator dressed as human as a xmas gift, karla stealing meds from her employer to drug her virgin sister, videotaping it, covering up the crime, not only staying with him, going on to parade around in her wedding dress, and seemingly increasing the intensity of their "love".

I have no doubt they are both very familiar with the Karla/Paul story. The similarities make me sick to my stomach

 

[LisaB]

Sorry for pulling old topics back to the top. I am catching up on the details in this case. Followed closely in the beginning but dropped out for awhile. The whole mess makes me so sad for Hailey and those who love her.

The first thing that comes to mind w/ith this particular items is WHAT else was Billie willing to trade her children for? Attention? The adoration of a predator? That speaks directly to how you view your child, as a commodity, and how that worth can be leveraged to you.

With all the video and camera issues, the mutual interest in killers/violence/horror for entertainment and enjoyment, the complete lack of boundaries and willingness to do anything to keep a man's attention this case reminds me more and more of Karla Homolka.

With xmas having just occurred I have the vision of Karla giving her little sister (15 years old) to her predator dressed as human as a xmas gift, karla stealing meds from her employer to drug her virgin sister, videotaping it, covering up the crime, not only staying with him, going on to parade around in her wedding dress, and seemingly increasing the intensity of their "love".

I have no doubt they are both very familiar with the Karla/Paul story. The similarities make me sick to my stomach

OMG! Wow. You really make a great point here. Karla did what she did on the theory that she "owed" Paul "a" virginity since she was not a virgin when they met. She offered up her little sister. Billie, obviously, would not have been expected to be a virgin, nor would Shawn, however, he may have wanted a "girl" for a girlfriend instead of an older woman, and she wanted to keep him so she agreed to him messing with Hailey rather than going outside the family. Sounds like a similar situation. Considering that the body was wrapped and presumably not dismembered, I'd say disposal was done by someone who cared about her, NOT Shawn, who would have gotten his jollies cutting her up.

 

[mck16]

OMG! Wow. You really make a great point here. Karla did what she did on the theory that she "owed" Paul "a" virginity since she was not a virgin when they met. She offered up her little sister. Billie, obviously, would not have been expected to be a virgin, nor would Shawn, however, he may have wanted a "girl" for a girlfriend instead of an older woman, and she wanted to keep him so she agreed to him messing with Hailey rather than going outside the family. Sounds like a similar situation. Considering that the body was wrapped and presumably not dismembered, I'd say disposal was done by someone who cared about her, NOT Shawn, who would have gotten his jollies cutting her up.

If the body was wrapped in a sheet or blanket I would say it was a matter of convenience. If she was murdered, and assaulted on a bed then all you would have to do is gather up the body in the blanket or wrap it while lying on the bed. I don't really think it indicates that the perp cared about her. Actually that is an oxymoron to me. I killed you, but I care about you so I am going to wrap you up. Doesn't make too much sense to me. jmo