Grandma insisted that she had never authorized the final transfer. Helen believed her account deserved serious consideration, particularly because we now had evidence that someone had used my mother's name and produced questionable signatures attributed to Dad. But the message from Richard claimed that Eleanor had approved the arrangement, and we needed to establish whether she had been present when the transfer was discussed.
The date was November 12, 1998.
Grandma remembered it because it was the day she traveled to Philadelphia to visit her older sister, who had undergone surgery. She had remained there for nearly a week.
"I can remember the hotel," she said. "It was near the hospital, and I spent most of the time in the waiting room. I didn't return to Boston until the eighteenth."
"Could you have signed something before leaving?" Helen asked.
"I might have signed ordinary business documents that week, but I never approved a transfer of the foundation's money. If Richard had asked me to authorize something like that, I would have insisted on seeing the accounts."
We searched Grandma's old calendars, travel receipts, and correspondence. The family had kept many of her papers because she had always recorded appointments in a small leather planner. The 1998 calendar was still in a drawer in her bedroom.
The entries confirmed that she had left Boston on November 10 and returned on November 18. Beside the dates were the name of the hospital, the address of the hotel, and several notes about her sister's recovery.
A receipt from the hotel showed that she had paid for six nights. There were also two postcards she had sent to my grandfather's former attorney, discussing her sister's condition.
The documents did not prove that Grandma had never approved the transfer before leaving, but they contradicted Richard's claim that she had personally confirmed it on November 12.
Helen asked the bank to identify the source of the message and whether it had been accompanied by a signed authorization. The institution located a fax cover sheet from the same date. It contained the initials E.W. and a note stating that the final transfer could proceed.
The fax number belonged to the Whitmore company's Boston office.
"Could someone have sent it on her behalf?" Daniel asked.
"Possibly," Helen said. "We need the original fax transmission records and any accompanying document."
The company's old telephone records were no longer available, but the bank had retained a scanned copy of the fax itself. The signature area was blank. The message appeared to have been typed by someone who had access to the company's office equipment.
That meant the initials alone were not evidence that Grandma had authorized the transfer.
We contacted Richard through Helen and asked him to provide the document he had relied upon when claiming that Eleanor approved the arrangement. He responded through his attorney, stating that he no longer possessed the original and could not recall who had sent the fax.
His explanation was brief and unconvincing, but we could not establish from the missing document alone that he had deliberately fabricated the authorization.
While Helen continued the inquiry, Grandma asked me to help her search another box of family papers. She had remembered a letter from my grandfather written shortly before his death. The letter had been stored with his personal correspondence rather than the foundation records.
We found it beneath a stack of birthday cards and old photographs.
The letter was dated October 1998, several weeks before the disputed transfer. My grandfather wrote that he was concerned about the foundation's financial position and wanted the family to avoid making any further transfers until the accounts had been reconciled.
He specifically instructed Richard not to move the custodial funds without the approval of both the foundation's representative and the independent reviewer.
At the bottom, he had written a sentence that made Grandma cover her mouth.
If James refuses to sign, do not use my name to override him. He is the only person who has insisted that the accounts be kept honest.*
I read the sentence aloud.
Grandma sat very still.
"Your grandfather trusted James more than he ever admitted," she said. "He knew Richard was taking risks with the company, but he believed the business could survive if the accounts were corrected."
"Did he know the money had already been moved?"
"I don't know. He was ill near the end, and Richard handled most of the business matters. I thought the letter was simply a warning about future transactions."
Helen photographed the letter and compared its date with the bank records. It had been written before the custodial account was opened, and it clearly stated that the funds were not to be moved without the required approvals.
The letter strengthened the evidence that Richard had acted against the instructions of the foundation's founder, but it did not identify the final beneficiary.
That question remained unresolved.
The next morning, Thomas Reed called with news. He had located a former employee of the bank who remembered the custodial account. The employee had retired years earlier but agreed to provide a statement about the bank's procedures at the time.
According to the employee, the bank had received two separate sets of instructions. The first established the custodial account and required two signatures for transfers. The second claimed that the foundation's board had approved an exception allowing Richard to move the funds without additional authorization.
The exception had been accepted because the bank received a fax bearing the company's letterhead.
However, the employee remembered that the fax had arrived without the required signature page. He had raised the issue with his supervisor, who instructed him to process the transfer because the transaction was considered urgent.
"Who gave that instruction?" Helen asked.
The former employee identified the supervisor as Robert Gaines, who had died several years earlier.
"Did he explain why the transfer was urgent?"
"He said the foundation was facing a legal deadline and that delaying the payment could cause the company to lose a property."
The explanation might have been legitimate, but the missing signature page and the subsequent transfer into Northbridge Holdings made it necessary to verify the claim.
Helen requested the original correspondence concerning the alleged deadline. The bank's archive contained a copy of a notice from a creditor demanding payment on a property loan. The notice was dated two weeks before the custodial account was opened.
The amount due was nearly equal to the sum transferred through the custodial account.
That was the first evidence suggesting that the money might have been used to cover a legitimate debt rather than simply diverted for personal gain.
But the creditor's records showed that the loan had already been paid in full before the custodial account was opened.
The payment had come from an account controlled by the private investment trust.
Richard had moved money into the trust, used it to settle the debt, and then transferred money from the foundation's custodial account to replenish the trust.
The sequence explained why he might have believed the transfer was necessary, but it also suggested that the foundation had been used to cover losses or obligations belonging to the private trust.
"That still doesn't tell us who received the final balance," I said.
"No," Helen replied. "But it explains why the records were complicated and why Richard may have been trying to conceal the movement of funds."
Grandma looked at the creditor's statement.
"He was trying to keep the company alive."
"Perhaps," Helen said. "But the means he used may have violated the foundation's rules and the instructions left by your grandfather."
That evening, Tyler arrived with a message from Richard. It was not sent through his attorney this time. Richard had written directly to Tyler, claiming that the family was misinterpreting the records and that he could explain the entire arrangement if everyone agreed to meet privately.
Tyler showed Helen the message.
She advised him not to attend without legal counsel, but Tyler wanted to hear what Richard had to say. He believed that if Richard could provide a credible explanation, the family might be able to resolve the matter without a prolonged dispute.
Grandma agreed to a meeting, provided Helen was present and every document Richard offered would be preserved.
Richard accepted the conditions.
The meeting was scheduled for the following afternoon at Grandma's house.
Before leaving, Helen received one final document from the bank: the original fax transmission record. It identified the telephone line from which the authorization had been sent.
The line was registered to the office of Richard Whitmore.
The fax had not come from Grandma's home, her attorney, or the foundation's independent reviewer.
It had come from Richard's office.
Click here to continue reading: PART 20: Richard Finally Agreed to Explain the Transfers, but the Documents He Brought Raised a More Disturbing Question About My Grandfather’s Estate
Grandma Placed Seven Envelopes Beneath the Christmas Tree, but the Last One Carried a Warning That Changed Everything
Part 19 of 35
