The information provided below does not constitute any assertions of fact with regards to the guilt or action of anyone mentioned. It is conjecture, provided for theoretical, educational, and entertainment purposes. I assume no legal responsibility for the accuracy or correctness of any facts or claims mentioned or for any consequences of relying on any details included. Any theory of supposed action by any party is merely alleged. All narrative characterization is speculative.I didn’t say she didn’t have a will. I said her and/Barry’s discussions with DH about updating wills/estate planning/gifts may be subject to privilege.
Honey saying she was updating her will doesn’t mean that was completed. The call from DH suggests in fact it wasn’t — otherwise why the late night call/meeting? Perhaps the timing of the murders is related to this.
Assuming Honey had a will before, which she was updating, we have no idea:
1) if DH was involved with that or had a copy of the earlier will;
2) who had a copy;
3) if she had terminated it (seems unusual without signing a new one but possible if she was unhappy with its terms)
4) if she terminated it and wrote a handwritten holograph will as a temporary replacement (possible as a bridge-and possible that it could go missing)
I think the timing of DH’s 9pm call is not a coincidence, meaning —at a minimum— major changes were afoot that others did not like.
If I were DH I would have obtained advice from the Law Society or legal counsel about what if anything he could do.
If the executors/those controlling Apotex (effectively the same people) are left as the ones instructing the counsel vetting privilege, it also strikes me that they could be in a conflict situation — ie not wanting this info to come to light (eg., JS, BK). Even if the new will wasn’t signed, it may not play well from lots of perspectives (motive, MS, etc) to have it come out, for example, that they intended to leave millions to charity, to MS, etc.
You didn't say she didn't have a will but the musing about signed versus not signed misses the point which is that there was a will. All evidence we have alludes to the fact she had a will and was in frequent communication with DH in the lead up. That is the point. It exists. Do you agree she had a legally viable will? It seems you do based on your later commentary. We also know DH was fanatically opposed to simple wills. That is exactly why HS will is so important. Whoever did it had inside info on numerous fronts. The will was the final piece of the crime. Securing it or destroying it.