You saw the Gucci movie recently. What if the R v. Cunningham case in Criminal law meets Re Vandervell's 1972 and 1974; an Estates case? Many people are mindful of this phenomenon called inheritance and their sense of acceptance. The wrong Neanderthal emerging in our community accidentally or residually with some unusual DNA maybe combined from a world of speculating servants and disloyal, bad heirs may say it's all about the Grendel servant de le Avant Garde; "...inheritance 'R us." Your inheritance is a gift as provided by a testator. This is usually some older relative. It is not to be stolen from the testator and nor is it a right as far as what the testator may or may not decide. It's not something you presume and then just steal. Someone stole my entire Super Heroes dvd collection for who she says is her son with me. That is theft under $5000.00. She also may have tried to kill me in a home I owned but had already sold. That says she would have tried to kill the new owner also. Maybe she is in danger. Does she keep attending that property? Inheritance is a formal life experience. It's a chapter of life for the testator and the beneficiary. But, will you kill to get what you want? Are you trying to be the only heir out of 10 siblings, impatiently killing the siblings and the testator because you can't wait? Read Re Vandervell's 1 and 2 Court of Appeal of England Wales, (1974). Respecting formalities is important or else the ownership and all that comes with it, will not pass from the owner and testator to you; the murderer with that will you wrote and sent a copy to the Baptist Union. It does not have to involve a will. It could involve property transferred by joint tenancy. But, no matter what it would involve multi generational cooperation and hopefully some Mutual appreciation and not the anxious rushing and schematic destruction of the older generation to an untimely death so that the selfish younger generations will say that they won or that they were the only one and will write the will of their older relative, shaping the result to their selfish liking. /////// /////// Would you kill your ancestor and testator slowly to say that you need to be sure they are dead that you might inherit? Your Hour of inheritance will come in due course from the people and family that raised you; not your school friend's mother or the choir director who just want to think is or might be your mother as some hour in a cultural phenomenon has arisen where you would like to be accepted as an heir or the heir; maybe the only heir of the family. /////// Heritage is the history of your ancestry and anything involving your ancestry and it could be photos, food, art and culture but its not your imaginary mothers spoons. Now, why imagine a 70 year old woman could be your mother and that you need to inherit from her simply because she is a property owner. Your mother could be the woman that raised you or the woman you were told was your Aunt; but who is really your birth mother? You should not confuse heritage and inheritance. They are not the same necessarily and why would you, as a mulatto West Indian Iroquois aboriginal who calls themselves Asian due to your yellow complexion not realise that there were Yellow Pangea men who spoke Icelandic. Swedish, Russian or Norwegian languages but who are not Asian actually seek to inherit from a Black woman just because she is turning 68 or more years old and she does not really own anything? You also notice that in her life after 68 years old, there are unusual things going on with her phone bill, her home, her bank accounts, her professional credentials that some people say they have the right to use jointly in her latter years (How can you borrow her dental hygienist qualification?) as if someone is involved in some ongoing impatient speculation on her life. The authorities have been notified.

 

You saw the Gucci movie recently.  

What if the  R v. Cunningham case in Criminal law  meets Re Vandervell's 1972 and 1974; an Estates case? 

 Many people are mindful of this phenomenon called inheritance and their sense of acceptance. The wrong Neanderthal emerging in our community accidentally or residually with some unusual DNA maybe combined from a world of speculating servants and disloyal, bad heirs may say it's all about the Grendel servant de le Avant Garde;   "...inheritance 'R us."

 Your inheritance is a gift as provided by a testator.  This is usually some older relative.  

It is not to be stolen from the testator and nor is it a right as far as what the testator may or may not decide.  It's not something you presume and then just steal.  Someone stole my entire Super Heroes dvd collection for who she says is her son with me. That is theft under $5000.00.   She also may have tried to kill me in a home I owned but had already sold.  That says she would have tried to kill the new owner also.  Maybe she is in danger. Does she keep attending that property? 

Inheritance is a formal life experience. It's a chapter of life for the testator and the beneficiary. 

But, will you kill to get what you want?  Are you trying to be the only heir out of 10 siblings, impatiently killing the siblings and the testator because you can't wait?  

Read Re Vandervell's 1 and 2 Court of Appeal of England Wales, (1974).  Respecting formalities is important or else the ownership and all that comes with it, will not pass from the owner and testator to you; the murderer with that will you wrote and sent a copy to the Baptist Union.  

It does not have to involve a will.  It could involve property transferred by joint tenancy. But, no matter what it would involve multi generational cooperation and hopefully some Mutual appreciation and not the anxious rushing and schematic destruction of the older generation  to an untimely death so that the selfish younger generations will say that they won or that they were the only one and will write the will of their older relative, shaping  the result to their selfish liking.     

///////

///////

 Would you kill your ancestor and testator slowly to say that you need to be sure they are dead that you might inherit? Your  Hour of inheritance will come in due course  from the people and family that raised you; not your school friend's mother or the choir director who just want to think is or might be your mother as some hour in a cultural phenomenon has arisen where you would like to be accepted as an heir or the heir; maybe the only heir of the family.      

///////

Heritage is the history of your ancestry and anything involving your ancestry and it could be photos, food, art and culture but its not your imaginary mothers spoons.  Now, why imagine a 70 year old woman could be your mother  and that you need to inherit from her simply because she is a property owner.  Your mother could be the woman that raised you or the woman you were told was your Aunt; but who is really your birth mother?     

You should not confuse heritage and inheritance.  They are not the same necessarily and why would you, as a mulatto  West Indian Iroquois aboriginal who calls themselves Asian due to your yellow complexion not realise that there were Yellow Pangea men who spoke Icelandic. Swedish, Russian  or Norwegian languages  but who are not Asian actually seek to inherit from a Black woman just because she is turning 68 or more years old and she does not really own anything?  You also notice that in her life after 68 years old, there are unusual things going on with her phone bill, her home, her bank accounts, her professional credentials that some people say they have the right to use jointly in her latter years (How can you borrow her dental hygienist qualification?)  as if someone is involved in some ongoing impatient speculation on her life. The authorities have been notified.