Wills, Trusts & Estates Prof Blog

Editor: Gerry W. Beyer
Texas Tech Univ. School of Law

Thursday, October 8, 2009

Anthony Marshall (Brooke Astor's son) Convicted

Marshall_Anthony According to John Eligon, Brooke Astor’s Son Guilty in Scheme to Defraud Her, NY Times, Oct. 8, 2009:

Mr. Marshall was found guilty of 14 of the 16 counts against him, including one of two first-degree grand larceny charges * * *. Jurors convicted him of giving himself an unauthorized raise of about $1 million for managing his mother’s finances. Prosecutors contended that Mrs. Astor’s Alzheimer’s had advanced so far that there was no way she could have consented to this raise and other financial decisions that benefited Mr. Marshall.

Sentencing comes next with a possible prison term of from one to twenty-five years which due to Mr. Marshall's advanced age (85) probably means a life sentence.  Of course, an appeal is to be expected.

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/trusts_estates_prof/2009/10/anthony-marshall-brooke-astors-son-convicted.html

Current Events | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef0120a6257e20970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Anthony Marshall (Brooke Astor's son) Convicted:

Comments

This is sad (I could care less about this guy & his lawyer), I'm sad because we are all going to get very old if we're lucky & once we start to lose our minds, even our own kids could still skrew us over in the end. Scary thoughts, it could happen to any of us.

Posted by: auto insurance quotes | Oct 8, 2009 1:33:03 PM

Of possibly more concern to many readers of this blog will be the conviction of Mr. Marshall's lawyer on several counts. On the one hand, I applaud the efforts of the authorities to crack down on financial abuse of the elderly. On the other hand, it alarms me somewhat that issues previously relegated to the domain of civil actions are now finding their way into the criminal courts.

Then again, the allegations here went far beyond those of the usual will contest. Perhaps the higher standard of proof required in criminal court will mean that only the most egregious cases wind up there.

Posted by: Tom Ellwanger | Oct 9, 2009 8:28:23 AM

Post a comment