- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:13 pm to tke857
Plummer family:
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:14 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
If she never intended to accept the funds, then why was it written into the very will that TCA, COAs attorney, and SU drafted and signed in July? These people have lost their fricking minds.
"Hey, pencil me in for 500/month for the next 20 years. I'm not gonna accept it, but I'd just like to throw it in there anyway".
I know, right? They have literally run out of ways to defend this woman so they are now just blatantly lying through their teeth. Notice the SJW just stopped answering when pressed.
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:15 pm to bbap
quote:
Chauna Banks -- I don't know the details, but I assume the 20 years is to take care of the estate until the great grandchildren come of age. That could include a lot of property mgt. and legal work. $500 a month is not a lot of money. I think the only issue here is I as COA Director probably would not have wanted that responsibility because of this kind of fallout. Hindsight is 20/20, but what the elderly lady did in her will is very common and the family members that will not benefit are always upset and cry foul. We just saw this with BBKing's estate.
oh Chauna...so, so very dumb. Continues to amaze me that people willingly vote for this simpleton. 
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:16 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
If she never intended to accept the funds, then why was it written into the very will that TCA, COAs attorney, and SU drafted and signed in July? These people have lost their fricking minds.
I'm guessing this will be Clark-Amar's defense and the NBR crew has already caught wind of it.
"oh I was going to refuse the funds anyway" or "that $500 fee was left on the document in error"
This post was edited on 4/4/17 at 3:18 pm
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:16 pm to BilJ
quote:
oh Chauna...so, so very dumb. Continues to amaze me that people willingly vote for this simpleton.
well take a look at her constituency
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:19 pm to BilJ
quote:
I don't know the details
quote:I wonder if she tells this to all the black men not paying child support... or her poorer constituents who pay this in rent...
$500 a month is not a lot of money
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:20 pm to BilJ
quote:
I think the only issue here is I as COA Director probably would not have wanted that responsibility because of this kind of fallout.
Yeah. Direct conflict of interest & ethical violations are such a drag.
This post was edited on 4/4/17 at 3:21 pm
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:21 pm to tke857
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:23 pm to bbap
Dumb Chauna acts like Clark-Amar was going to be the trustee of a $50M trust. Clark-Amar stood to make a frickING third of the value of the trust. How do these retards not see this as a problem? This is NOT a complicated trust, it will NOT require all sorts of property management and legal expenses. It will require the trustee dispensing money every once in a while to grandchildren. That's it. If Clark-Amar is such a good person like the SJW's keep saying, why didn't she volunteer her services for free?
Clark-Amar stood to make a frickING third of the value of the trust. How do these retards not see this as a problem? This is NOT a complicated trust, it will NOT require all sorts of property management and legal expenses. It will require the trustee dispensing money every once in a while to grandchildren. That's it. If Clark-Amar is such a good person like the SJW's keep saying, why didn't she volunteer her services for free?
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:24 pm to skullhawk
pretty great fraud loop hole they've found here "ah yeah look I wasn't really going to steal that. So we're good here?"
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:28 pm to skullhawk
quote:
I'm guessing this will be Clark-Amar's defense and the NBR crew has already caught wind of it.
"oh I was going to refuse the funds anyway" or "that $500 fee was left on the document in error"
This is 1000% correct.
"I wrote it in there but I'm not going to take it now that it makes me look like a piece of shite"
I honestly think the people defending this woman are worse than she is. It's one thing to perpetrate such a thing, but it's another to staunchly defend it and bash the deceased's family at the same time.
MM, CB, GC...frick every single one of you. Watching y'all go down in flames is going to be enjoyable to watch.
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:30 pm to ell_13
quote:
"Do Good and Seek Justice - Gary Chambers"
-The Bible
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:30 pm to Jim Smith
quote:
How do these retards not see this as a problem? This is NOT a complicated trust, it will NOT require all sorts of property management and legal expenses. It will require the trustee dispensing money every once in a while to grandchildren.
The trust has a lot of ins and outs, and lot of what have you's. It's a complicated case.
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:35 pm to bbap
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:39 pm to fr33manator
Everyday you attach an anchor to these threads
Every. fricking. Day.
Every. fricking. Day.
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:41 pm to fr33manator
(no message)
This post was edited on 4/4/17 at 3:57 pm
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:52 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
then why was it written into the very will that TCA, COAs attorney, and SU drafted and signed in July?
I missed this. link?
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:55 pm to upgrayedd
Wtf did I do? I didn't mention the one who must not be named or what she did.
And the thread isn't anchored.
And the thread isn't anchored.
This post was edited on 4/4/17 at 3:57 pm
Posted on 4/4/17 at 3:57 pm to Jim Smith
Someone post this on Gary's page:
Just to be clear, many of you don't see how there is a conflict of interest despite the fact that the head of the COA, along with an attorney of the COA, drove a 95 year old woman (who was in the care of the COA) to Southern law school and helped her write a will that placed the head of the COA personally (and not through the organization) as the executrix of the estate to the tune of $126,000 (which she miraculously wrote in the will but now claims she won't accept)?
All this without notifying her family or potential beneficiaries.
Just to be clear, many of you don't see how there is a conflict of interest despite the fact that the head of the COA, along with an attorney of the COA, drove a 95 year old woman (who was in the care of the COA) to Southern law school and helped her write a will that placed the head of the COA personally (and not through the organization) as the executrix of the estate to the tune of $126,000 (which she miraculously wrote in the will but now claims she won't accept)?
All this without notifying her family or potential beneficiaries.
This post was edited on 4/4/17 at 4:07 pm
Page 9 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News