(06-09-2026 01:01 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:45 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:42 PM)mlb Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:32 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Holy crap, the guy is accused of killing his parents, yet he has the gall to ask for their money to defend himself against the charges. That's Looney Tunes level BS right there.

Yeah, I can only imagine how the rest of the family feels knowing he killed them and now wants their money to defend himself in court.

Can you imagine the size of the balls this kid has to do that?

Well, in America one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. I couldn't imagine an honest judge saying the kid couldn't get HIS money as long as it is owed him.

Without me going back, or Googling, etc., I feel like his parents had cut him off already, so in my mind, I wouldn't think he's owed anything.

(06-09-2026 01:10 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 01:01 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:45 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:42 PM)mlb Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:32 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Holy crap, the guy is accused of killing his parents, yet he has the gall to ask for their money to defend himself against the charges. That's Looney Tunes level BS right there.

Yeah, I can only imagine how the rest of the family feels knowing he killed them and now wants their money to defend himself in court.

Can you imagine the size of the balls this kid has to do that?

Well, in America one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. I couldn't imagine an honest judge saying the kid couldn't get HIS money as long as it is owed him.

Without me going back, or Googling, etc., I feel like his parents had cut him off already, so in my mind, I wouldn't think he's owed anything.

If that's the case he is probably screwed. Because you can bet your ass if he got a hold of that money, the Leftist defense attorneys would be crawling over each other to get retained.

Under California Probate Code section 250, the Slayer Statute prohibits any person who feloniously and intentionally kills a decedent from inheriting from that person’s estate. The law treats the killer as if they predeceased the victim, thereby disqualifying them from receiving benefits under wills, trusts, intestate succession, life insurance, or joint tenancy rights.

Link

(06-09-2026 01:01 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:45 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:42 PM)mlb Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:32 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Holy crap, the guy is accused of killing his parents, yet he has the gall to ask for their money to defend himself against the charges. That's Looney Tunes level BS right there.

Yeah, I can only imagine how the rest of the family feels knowing he killed them and now wants their money to defend himself in court.

Can you imagine the size of the balls this kid has to do that?

Well, in America one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. I couldn't imagine an honest judge saying the kid couldn't get HIS money as long as it is owed him.

I don't think anything was "owed him." If you are accused of killing your parents, are you really allowed to take any inheritance in their will (assuming he was even in their will at this point) and use it to potentially get himself off from their murders? Seriously?

I would think in a case like this, the will would not be executed until after this case was resolved.

So, I asked Google the question, and got this response:

Quote:In the U.S. and many common-law jurisdictions, an accused murderer cannot inherit from their victims. Under state Slayer Statutes or the Slayer Rule, anyone who feloniously and intentionally kills someone is disqualified from receiving their assets. The accused cannot use that money to defend themselves because they are treated as if they predeceased the victims.

(06-09-2026 01:15 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 01:01 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:45 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:42 PM)mlb Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:32 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Holy crap, the guy is accused of killing his parents, yet he has the gall to ask for their money to defend himself against the charges. That's Looney Tunes level BS right there.

Yeah, I can only imagine how the rest of the family feels knowing he killed them and now wants their money to defend himself in court.

Can you imagine the size of the balls this kid has to do that?

Well, in America one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. I couldn't imagine an honest judge saying the kid couldn't get HIS money as long as it is owed him.

I don't think anything was "owed him." If you are accused of killing your parents, are you really allowed to take any inheritance in their will (assuming he was even in their will at this point) and use it to potentially get himself off from their murders? Seriously?

I would think in a case like this, the will would not be executed until after this case was resolved.

So, I asked Google the question, and got this response:

Quote:In the U.S. and many common-law jurisdictions, an accused murderer cannot inherit from their victims. Under state Slayer Statutes or the Slayer Rule, anyone who feloniously and intentionally kills someone is disqualified from receiving their assets. The accused cannot use that money to defend themselves because they are treated as if they predeceased the victims.

But if the money was in a Trust Fund it is his subject to the Trustor. Am I wrong? That money isn't an inheritance. I'm not on the dude's side, but I'm sure there are some cases in which the "accused murderer" may have not actually done the deed.

(06-09-2026 01:45 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 01:15 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 01:01 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:45 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:42 PM)mlb Wrote:  Yeah, I can only imagine how the rest of the family feels knowing he killed them and now wants their money to defend himself in court.

Can you imagine the size of the balls this kid has to do that?

Well, in America one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. I couldn't imagine an honest judge saying the kid couldn't get HIS money as long as it is owed him.

I don't think anything was "owed him." If you are accused of killing your parents, are you really allowed to take any inheritance in their will (assuming he was even in their will at this point) and use it to potentially get himself off from their murders? Seriously?

I would think in a case like this, the will would not be executed until after this case was resolved.

So, I asked Google the question, and got this response:

Quote:In the U.S. and many common-law jurisdictions, an accused murderer cannot inherit from their victims. Under state Slayer Statutes or the Slayer Rule, anyone who feloniously and intentionally kills someone is disqualified from receiving their assets. The accused cannot use that money to defend themselves because they are treated as if they predeceased the victims.

But if the money was in a Trust Fund it is his subject to the Trustor. Am I wrong? That money isn't an inheritance. I'm not on the dude's side, but I'm sure there are some cases in which the "accused murderer" may have not actually done the deed.

If I understood the statue correctly, even if it's a trust, he may not be allowed to touch it until the trial is over and he's found not guilty.

I dunno... You know who you could ask and not get an answer from right?

ETA:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/rob-...r-killings

Seems like there is a trust that is set up.. He was to receive half at 30 and the other half at 35.. I know the Reiners had cut him off financially and it's the trustee who's denying him access.

(06-09-2026 04:03 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 01:45 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 01:15 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 01:01 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 12:45 PM)gdunn Wrote:  Can you imagine the size of the balls this kid has to do that?

Well, in America one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. I couldn't imagine an honest judge saying the kid couldn't get HIS money as long as it is owed him.

I don't think anything was "owed him." If you are accused of killing your parents, are you really allowed to take any inheritance in their will (assuming he was even in their will at this point) and use it to potentially get himself off from their murders? Seriously?

I would think in a case like this, the will would not be executed until after this case was resolved.

So, I asked Google the question, and got this response:

Quote:In the U.S. and many common-law jurisdictions, an accused murderer cannot inherit from their victims. Under state Slayer Statutes or the Slayer Rule, anyone who feloniously and intentionally kills someone is disqualified from receiving their assets. The accused cannot use that money to defend themselves because they are treated as if they predeceased the victims.

But if the money was in a Trust Fund it is his subject to the Trustor. Am I wrong? That money isn't an inheritance. I'm not on the dude's side, but I'm sure there are some cases in which the "accused murderer" may have not actually done the deed.

If I understood the statue correctly, even if it's a trust, he may not be allowed to touch it until the trial is over and he's found not guilty.

I dunno... You know who you could ask and not get an answer from right?

ETA:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/rob-...r-killings

Seems like there is a trust that is set up.. He was to receive half at 30 and the other half at 35.. I know the Reiners had cut him off financially and it's the trustee who's denying him access.

hush yo' mouth, you dadgum doe exterminator ...

(06-09-2026 04:09 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 04:03 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 01:45 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 01:15 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 01:01 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Well, in America one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. I couldn't imagine an honest judge saying the kid couldn't get HIS money as long as it is owed him.

I don't think anything was "owed him." If you are accused of killing your parents, are you really allowed to take any inheritance in their will (assuming he was even in their will at this point) and use it to potentially get himself off from their murders? Seriously?

I would think in a case like this, the will would not be executed until after this case was resolved.

So, I asked Google the question, and got this response:

Quote:In the U.S. and many common-law jurisdictions, an accused murderer cannot inherit from their victims. Under state Slayer Statutes or the Slayer Rule, anyone who feloniously and intentionally kills someone is disqualified from receiving their assets. The accused cannot use that money to defend themselves because they are treated as if they predeceased the victims.

But if the money was in a Trust Fund it is his subject to the Trustor. Am I wrong? That money isn't an inheritance. I'm not on the dude's side, but I'm sure there are some cases in which the "accused murderer" may have not actually done the deed.

If I understood the statue correctly, even if it's a trust, he may not be allowed to touch it until the trial is over and he's found not guilty.

I dunno... You know who you could ask and not get an answer from right?

ETA:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/rob-...r-killings

Seems like there is a trust that is set up.. He was to receive half at 30 and the other half at 35.. I know the Reiners had cut him off financially and it's the trustee who's denying him access.

hush yo' mouth, you dadgum doe exterminator ...

You know I can't say no to the ladies

(06-09-2026 04:10 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 04:09 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 04:03 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 01:45 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(06-09-2026 01:15 PM)TripleA Wrote:  I don't think anything was "owed him." If you are accused of killing your parents, are you really allowed to take any inheritance in their will (assuming he was even in their will at this point) and use it to potentially get himself off from their murders? Seriously?

I would think in a case like this, the will would not be executed until after this case was resolved.

So, I asked Google the question, and got this response:

But if the money was in a Trust Fund it is his subject to the Trustor. Am I wrong? That money isn't an inheritance. I'm not on the dude's side, but I'm sure there are some cases in which the "accused murderer" may have not actually done the deed.

If I understood the statue correctly, even if it's a trust, he may not be allowed to touch it until the trial is over and he's found not guilty.

I dunno... You know who you could ask and not get an answer from right?

ETA:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/rob-...r-killings

Seems like there is a trust that is set up.. He was to receive half at 30 and the other half at 35.. I know the Reiners had cut him off financially and it's the trustee who's denying him access.

hush yo' mouth, you dadgum doe exterminator ...

You know I can't say no to the ladies

BREAKING: Prosecutors take death penalty off the table for Nick Reiner in murder of Rob, Michele Reiner