Grannie Speakman :

[Caroline]

That is a good point.

Committing the massacre would mean his inheritance would be substantially increased when MS dies.

Exactly!!

[Adam]

Adam I never expected to be in anyone's will and I was right because I was'ent

Not even mummies and daddies ?

[susan]

Adam what makes you think my mummies and daddies have gone to heaven

[Adam]

Jeremy was in a no lose situation regarding MS.

If she had deceased before the massacre, it would have gone to June/Neville. Meaning more for Jeremy to inherit.

If she was still alive, he would inherit when she died.

[Jan]

I never expected to be in my grandparents will. I wasn't.

I expected to be in my mothers & step fathers will. I was.

If Jeremy was not expecting to be included in MS  will, then there is no motivation 'not' to kill.

Adam I have said I don't know whether he knew he was in her will or not- perhaps he was not actualy named , but as his parents had died then he would have inherited - so perhaps you are correct , but I am not going to make assumptions until I know the facts.

I am guessing that perhaps he did only become a beneficiary if his parents died - and I guess the relatives cottoned on to that fact pretty quickly which is why the will was changed.

But we still don't know if he was aware of ANY of that until later do we? We don't know even if he had a clue how much the estate was worth ?

And was it morally right that he was excluded from the will before he had even been found guilty?

Lets be honest and not jump to any conclusions until we know the facts .

[Adam]

I thought he was only disinherited after conviction. Which is UK law ?

[Jan]

I thought he was only disinherited after conviction. Which is UK law ?

No he was written out of GS will before he was convicted ( according to anne Eaton)

Part of the reason he failed in his case about the caravan park and his entitlement in the business was I believe that he was a convicted criminal and therefore his claims on the shareholding I believe became invalid.

I wonder if Jeremy had not been written out , in fact who would have been his rightful heir to GS inheritance when he was convicted ? that would have been complicated?

[Jane]

No he was written out of GS will before he was convicted ( according to anne Eaton)

Part of the reason he failed in his case about the caravan park and his entitlement in the business was I believe that he was a convicted criminal and therefore his claims on the shareholding I believe became invalid.

I wonder if Jeremy had not been written out , in fact who would have been his rightful heir to GS inheritance when he was convicted ? that would have been complicated?

Jasnsus, I'm very happy to be corrected, but I believe it to be impossible for the children of a convicted killer to inherit. If this IS the case it may be that if there is no family who can inherit, their assets go to the Crown.

[Adam]

The big question is was he in GS will prior to the massacre ?

[Jane]

The big question is was he in GS will prior to the massacre ?

I don't think there is any liklihood of us ever knowing the answer to that.

[Jan]

The big question is was he in GS will prior to the massacre ?

go and read Annes statement of 1991 - see if you can work it out .

[Jan]

Jasnsus, I'm very happy to be corrected, but I believe it to be impossible for the children of a convicted killer to inherit. If this IS the case it may be that if there is no family who can inherit, their assets go to the Crown.

that is a good point - so if they had not got GS to change her will , then the family would not have got what would have been Jeremys share .

I guess sheilas share would have also been complicated.

I bet the familys legal team had to work hard on all the connotations.

[Jan]

here you go - June was the person who would have inherited , then Sheila and Jeremy .

But that does not prove that Jeremy knew anything about the estate before the murders.

[Jane]

that is a good point - so if they had not got GS to change her will , then the family would not have got what would have been Jeremys share .

I guess sheilas share would have also been complicated.

I bet the familys legal team had to work hard on all the connotations.

Whatever the circumstances, I don't believe any of us would willingly allow the Crown to take an inheritance b ut it would have been a HUGE irony, given that this was supposedly a crime committed to GAIN money, if the Crown had ended up with it.

[Jan]

so in fact it would have been June that would have inherited and then her children upon her death.

So yes Jeremy would have been apparently a wealthy man within time.

What conversations if any could have happened about the estate between june and her family I guess we will never know - but she did make it clear in her note that she did love Jeremy and Sheila a lot,