Judge Ron Harmon decided he needs more time and info before he makes a decision.
Harmon wants more legal documents about how monies were used.
The judge said he does believe the majority of money was given for use by and for the Winkler children while some was given specifically to Dan Dianne Winkler.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Response To Guardian Ad Litem
Kay Farese Turner:
Thinks the money is or is not the children's money referring to the Guardian Ad Litem's comments.
This is not a simple case. Is this money that belongs to children and if so, who received it and was it appropriate and should it be repaid.
Kay Farese Turner would like the court to pay her fees regarding getting the money back
Thinks the money is or is not the children's money referring to the Guardian Ad Litem's comments.
This is not a simple case. Is this money that belongs to children and if so, who received it and was it appropriate and should it be repaid.
Kay Farese Turner would like the court to pay her fees regarding getting the money back
Guardian Ad Litem
Says he thinks the Winkler's made decisions that were in the children's best interests and that any of us would have done the same thing. Thinks the trip to Disney World and items that were bought benefitted the kids.
Wishes "immediate needs" had been defined at the beginning. Never saw anything in excess. All things were done promoting what was in best interest of the children.
Direct accounting for life insurance and social security money.
Thinks remaining money should be paid into the court to avoid any other questions and issues.
Sees a difference between the two trusts that were set up. One was 100% for the kids while the other did not.
Wishes "immediate needs" had been defined at the beginning. Never saw anything in excess. All things were done promoting what was in best interest of the children.
Direct accounting for life insurance and social security money.
Thinks remaining money should be paid into the court to avoid any other questions and issues.
Sees a difference between the two trusts that were set up. One was 100% for the kids while the other did not.
Closing Arguments
Greg Smith For the Winklers:
Money belongs to the trust not to the Winkler children.
Fund is not owned by the children, it is clearly owned by the Huntingdon Church Of Christ.
People give money to all sorts of fund and organizations for use as they see fit. The law says if a donor who has given a conditional gift and is unhappy with how its spent, the donor can ask for the return of the gift. Not one single person has said they want their money back.
Money does not belong to Winkler children and has been watched carefully by the Winklers
Money belongs to the trust not to the Winkler children.
Fund is not owned by the children, it is clearly owned by the Huntingdon Church Of Christ.
People give money to all sorts of fund and organizations for use as they see fit. The law says if a donor who has given a conditional gift and is unhappy with how its spent, the donor can ask for the return of the gift. Not one single person has said they want their money back.
Money does not belong to Winkler children and has been watched carefully by the Winklers
Closing Arguments
Kay Farese Turner:
Says account was set up by church. Clearly intent of trust was 100% percent for the children of Mary Winkler. Says Winkler's former attorney admitted that previously.
Says there's been a lot of "double speak" in this case, written and oral.
Says court must decide whose money this is and that she thinks its for the kids.
What remedy is there if it is determined the money belongs to the girls. Winkler's should have watched over the money and protected it.
Says if $30,000 of fund money was spent on a van to carry the girls then the van should be given to Mary Winkler.
$150,000 for attorneys fees from account.
"All of this money, all of it, was the children's money."
"Ignorance of the law is no excuse"
"
Miss Winkler has no money, she is indigent. The court has signed papers saying she is indigent. We have not received one penny yet we've issued three subpoenas."
"Like pulling teeth out of a crow, we finally get the documents."
Court should take all of the remaining funds and watch over it.
Regarding money that's been spent, a case should be filed in Williamson County for misuse of funds.
Says account was set up by church. Clearly intent of trust was 100% percent for the children of Mary Winkler. Says Winkler's former attorney admitted that previously.
Says there's been a lot of "double speak" in this case, written and oral.
Says court must decide whose money this is and that she thinks its for the kids.
What remedy is there if it is determined the money belongs to the girls. Winkler's should have watched over the money and protected it.
Says if $30,000 of fund money was spent on a van to carry the girls then the van should be given to Mary Winkler.
$150,000 for attorneys fees from account.
"All of this money, all of it, was the children's money."
"Ignorance of the law is no excuse"
"
Miss Winkler has no money, she is indigent. The court has signed papers saying she is indigent. We have not received one penny yet we've issued three subpoenas."
"Like pulling teeth out of a crow, we finally get the documents."
Court should take all of the remaining funds and watch over it.
Regarding money that's been spent, a case should be filed in Williamson County for misuse of funds.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
