North Florida Nesties
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
WDYT re: Marital Assets & Murder Defense
This might be kinda heavy for a Friday afternoon, but it got me thinking.
I was just reading an interview in People magazine with the husband of that wackadoo in Tampa that shot her kids a few months ago. He, not shockingly, filed for divorce. She petitioned to have all marital assets frozen until her trial was up... as means to provide for her defense.
How do you feel about this? Do you think it's fair? Do you think the assets should just be divided equally as if the trial wasn't going on?
I think it's ridiculously unfair for the husband. Defense costs can go sky high & I'd hate to see him ruined financially because his wife went batshit.
Re: WDYT re: Marital Assets & Murder Defense
I was under the impression that everything was frozen, then she goes on trial and is convicted while her defense is put on a tab, then the divorce proceedings happen and they divide what they have by half, so he would still get half of everything, as would she, but her half would all be liquidated to pay for the defense after the fact. Am I wrong in my understanding? I would think freezing the assets would be best for him because if not, she could use all of their assets to pay for her defense, then the divorce would happen and it would be dividing up nothing.
Either way, I feel awful for the guy and think there's got to be a way he's protected here?
Thanks to Google, here's what I found out:
Request to freeze Julie Schenecker's assets denied by judge
Posted: 02/24/2011
TAMPA, Fla. - After her attorneys asked to ensure Julie Schenecker's assets would be available in order to get paid, a judge sided with her estranged husband, and denied the request.
Schenecker is facing murder charges, accused of killing her two children in late January.
Attorneys for Julie Schenecker had filed a motion in court to have her assets frozen and a lien placed against her. Freezing her assets would ensure that Schenecker could pay the public defenders representing her in court.
In cases like Schenecker?s, in which a lengthy defense is necessary, a judge may determine she should have to pay for some of her legal defense, despite using a public defender.
?It is not unusual for a defendant who has the ability to pay to put in some money to defray the cost,? said Stephen Crawford, a former federal prosecutor and currently a defense attorney in Tampa.
Schenecker?s husband, Col. Parker Schenecker, however, filed an opposition to the motion. He is trying to divorce his wife.
According to the document his attorney filed, freezing Julie Schenecker?s assets would have delayed divorce proceedings. He was also concerned he would ultimately have to pay for her defense costs, which he does not want to do.
?Much more disturbingly (than delaying the divorce proceedings), however, it appears to be an attempt to compel Colonel Schenecker -- who had only intended to participate in these proceedings to give a voice to his children, the victims -- to fund the defense,? the court document reads.
Circuit Judge Ashley Moody ruled Thursday afternoon without a hearing
I guess I don't understand how that works... if she freezes them, then only SHE has access to them? I saw something else that said that if they granted the freeze to her, he couldn't put the house on the market, but she could pay her lawyers?
Idk. to me "freeze" means, well, frozen. Regardless of who wants at it.. Maybe there's some kind of legal-fee loophole, and her lawyers are saying they need to be sure the husband doesn't take all of the money before they get paid..?