The Murder of Rob and Michele Reiner in Brentwood, California

I’m watching a live report that Rob Reiner and his wife were stabbed to death in Brentwood and it might’ve been by Rob‘s son. Still waiting for verification.

 

[Mel70]

So you think the citizens should pay for his defense? Because that it the only other option here and if he's a part of the estate, then it is his money he would be using. I don't understand why people think the citizens should be paying for his defense when he has access to funds to pay for it.

Because he murdered his parents is why he has access to the estate.

 

[Mel70]

So you think the citizens should pay for his defense? Because that it the only other option here and if he's a part of the estate, then it is his money he would be using. I don't understand why people think the citizens should be paying for his defense when he has access to funds to pay for it.

Get a public defender.

 

[Kimster]

So you think the citizens should pay for his defense? Because that it the only other option here and if he's a part of the estate, then it is his money he would be using. I don't understand why people think the citizens should be paying for his defense when he has access to funds to pay for it.

I think she means in this case where the funds would come from the people being murdered. I don’t think she means from his own funds.

 

[Guess Who]

Because he murdered his parents is why he has access to the estate.

but that means that the citizens should pay for his defense when he does have access to it?

Also, how do we know that he did not already have access to funds from the estate, like a trust that is doled out on a schedule? That money would be from the estate, too.

 

[Guess Who]

I think she means in this case where the funds would come from the people being murdered. I don’t think she means from his own funds.

That logic would still make the citizens responsible for his defense and that is a crime in itself if he is named in the estate.

 

[Guess Who]

Get a public defender.

So you want to pay for his defense? I sure don't, especially when he has access to funds. The public pays for a pubic defender.

 

[Mel70]

but that means that the citizens should pay for his defense when he does have access to it?

Also, how do we know that he did not already have access to funds from the estate, like a trust that is doled out on a schedule? That money would be from the estate, too.

Right. A trust for after their deaths.

 

[Mel70]

So you want to pay for his defense? I sure don't, especially when he has access to funds. The public pays for a pubic defender.

I know.

 

[Kimster]

Guessy, you’re making me think before I finish my 1st cup of coffee. But I’ll bet if his parents were able to have a say in it, they would want their money used for him to get the best defense, and if that means being in a mental hospital the rest of his life, so be it. Just seems like that would be what they would want, whether I agree with it or not.

 

[Mel70]

That logic would still make the citizens responsible for his defense and that is a crime in itself if he is named in the estate.

He killed them. So he should get nothing.

 

[Guess Who]

Right. A trust for after their deaths.

Not always. Many rich have trusts set up to dole out funds while they are alive. I know quite a few trust fund kids where the person that formed the trust is still alive and kicking. It's all in the way it's set up. It's called a living trust for a reason. There are tax advantages to doing so.

A "will" is what you are thinking of. They take effect after death.

 

[Guess Who]

Guessy, you’re making me think before I finish my 1st cup of coffee. But I’ll bet if his parents were able to have a say in it, they would want their money used for him to get the best defense, and if that means being in a mental hospital the rest of his life, so be it. Just seems like that would be what they would want, whether I agree with it or not.

Exactly, plus his siblings might have had a say in it too.

I sure want the public defenders to be used for the people that actually need them that have no funds available to them. The true indigent NEEDS them to be available to them and not some trust fund person using up all the funds that are allotted to public defenders.

 

[Guess Who]

Not always. Many rich have trusts set up to dole out funds while they are alive. I know quite a few trust fund kids where the person that formed the trust is still alive and kicking. It's all in the way it's set up. It's called a living trust for a reason. There are tax advantages to doing so.

A "will" is what you are thinking of. They take effect after death.

a prime example I have close to me is a lady I worked for has a trust set up to pay the property taxes for several Habitat for Humanity house owners each year and she is very much still alive.

 

[GrandmaBear]

I haven't seen it.

I linked it above, it's the full movie. It's a good watch imo.

 

[GrandmaBear]

I agree. A mental hospital. So he can be deemed fit to join society?. No. Estate paying for his trial. They shouldn't have that option.

yeah, blood money from the blood he spilled to pay for his defense for the blood he spilled. What is right about that??? NOTHING.

 

[GrandmaBear]

He's declared mentally incompetent. He will go to a mental hospital rather than prison.

Well I think there's more to it than that but generally that's what they hope yep.

 

[GrandmaBear]

So you think the citizens should pay for his defense? Because that it the only other option here and if he's a part of the estate, then it is his money he would be using. I don't understand why people think the citizens should be paying for his defense when he has access to funds to pay for it.

The money comes from the estate of the people he allegedly killed. Had he not killed them, there's be NO money. There is NOTHING right about that.

 

[GrandmaBear]

but that means that the citizens should pay for his defense when he does have access to it?

Also, how do we know that he did not already have access to funds from the estate, like a trust that is doled out on a schedule? That money would be from the estate, too.

Maybe from grandpa, that would be different, he didn't kill him. Doubtful the parents had trusts that were giving money while they were alive.

 

[Mel70]

Not always. Many rich have trusts set up to dole out funds while they are alive. I know quite a few trust fund kids where the person that formed the trust is still alive and kicking. It's all in the way it's set up. It's called a living trust for a reason. There are tax advantages to doing so.

A "will" is what you are thinking of. They take effect after death.

I was thinking of a trust.

 

[GrandmaBear]

That logic would still make the citizens responsible for his defense and that is a crime in itself if he is named in the estate.

We don't know that he doesn't have money of his own although I think it doubtful or he wouldn't have needed mummy and daddy to pay for everything and house him.

If not his own money, then it should be public defender for him unless someone ALIVE that he did not allegedly murder wants to foot the bill.