Suspicious death of Gene Hackman, his wife and their dog in New Mexico - February 2025

Carbon monoxide?

 

[GrandmaBear]

From the beginning, I didn't think "suspicious" was the right word.
Anyway, I'm glad it's resolved.
You know, Hackman was such a good actor! I recently watched Runaway Jury, a movie with Hackman that I'd never seen. It's very good! (I watched it on Tubi.)

Good Lord I saw that so many years ago and read the book first by Grisham. I had to think twice about it, it's been so long.

From the beginning I've never thought foul play but I'm not yet satisfied with the answers either. Not that easily.

It's extremely unusual for both to be dead at different times and unfortunately there is major money involved. I say unfortunately because it can't be ignored.

I'm just not someone who is satisfied with "easy" answers though. I wasn't buying the carbon monoxide from almost the beginning that was so latched onto. Imo it was for one reason because that explains more than one person dead in a home without obvious signs of foul play.

I don't want to make it into anything either, I'd like them both to have respect in their passing, and she should be named in the thread as well. She was his wife of many years but it's like she's an afterthought since he was famous.

He was an awesome actor who I think most want remembered that way. She imo is kind of being treated as nonsignificant other...

Anyhow hello lol. You never fail to surprise me. I never know what your opinion is going to be case to case. It keeps it interesting no doubt.

I'm not ready to just take the "answers" and I think more needs to come in this one. I'm not okay with it yet.

It made more sense in the beginning imo. It makes far less now.

The rush to carbon monoxide but only to find they didn't even check or enter when someone was first concerned about them... The CO2 never made sense to me in a sprawling home unless huddled in one area of it. Personally I thought it ridiculous yet that's what everyone jumped to, even LE or so it sounds only to find it wrong.

I don't fall into the nutty sh*t out there however again it's not enough for me yet. And there are answers not yet in either.

The necropsy with the dog wasn't in... Not sure why that would take longer especially if neglected, starved, dehydrated. I'm not even sure why they had the "vet" at the PC.

I'm actually not "not" sold on this (I know, a double negative) but I'm not sold yet either....

And just watch about the Dr. who what, never saw the pacemaker info?? More is going to come here, I'm not saying foul play, just that more will come. All the answers aren't in yet.

Definitely it will be asked why no one when called entered or checked for how long, and definitely the doctor will be a thing.

There's one other thing I've never said or has never been broached here although who knows out there... And that's about her dying first... And she is definitely treated as not as important as she didn't have his fame... I'm not going to go there because I don't want in any way to show any disrespect but he did have Alzheimer's apparently... Advanced even so it was said.

Yeah, more answers need to come.

He was a great actor, that is one thing I have no doubt about. I should go back and watch all that he was in.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Is this true? There is so much garbage out there on this case it's hard to say. Allegedly the kids get nothing and all the 80M is going to charity? It was if I have it correct to go to her (Betsy) but because they confirmed she died first, it now goes to charity.

Again there is a LOT of garbage out there, does anyone know for a fact?

 

[Kimster]

Is this true? There is so much garbage out there on this case it's hard to say. Allegedly the kids get nothing and all the 80M is going to charity? It was if I have it correct to go to her (Betsy) but because they confirmed she died first, it now goes to charity.

Again there is a LOT of garbage out there, does anyone know for a fact?

I have no idea.

 

[GrandmaBear]

I have no idea.

They are sure making a lot of junk out there from this, not sure what's true. First I heard the kids were fighting over the inheritance before the causes of death were even out, now I've heard none of them get anything anyhow.

I guess it shouldn't be a surprise that with his estate, their seclusion, the odd fact both were found dead, that this should go berserk out there.

It is why I generally don't do Hollywood or famous people stories/cases.

This one however was very easy to get sucked into, who doesn't know who he is (maybe younger people don't) and it was so unusual.

I don't look at crap channels but one still sees headlines and the garbage is abundant.

It would have to mean, if true, he totally disinherited his kids. However, I'd also think that would be bigger news if so, so I'm not believing it yet.

I also don't want to start some false talk but that's what I saw. But I've seen some dumber headlines too that I don't buy.

I was hoping someone knew.

I did watch one show of someone I've watched before and is usually pretty reliable. Well not the whole show but part of it. The chat was driving me nuts so I left. Man the vultures...

It could be true or not but a main them was how she controlled him and I don't know what's true but I look at the fact they were together for many years, he was seen around town until recently, he was seen for his health, he had his pacemaker, he had a bike, etc. I don't see that as likely control? If anything she likely helped him live to his 90s is what it seems to me. AT least just going by what seems to be fact. She died first and young and he lived to a ripe old age.

What is wrong with people?? Oh and they're saying he just wanted an Asian woman, etc. MY GOD it's why I don't usually follow these kinds of fame cases. I was surprised at the crap on that channel.

Maybe there's truth to it, I don't know, but I more likely think people just think it okay to do that in something like this or where they are public figures, or he was, etc.

There was already enough going on re his kids and wondering why they seemed to not be in contact, etc.

And again, I don't watch the crap. UnREAL.

Anyhow, I got out of that one, I've hit 2 now over all this time and jumped out but I do see other headlines constantly.

The thing about his inheritance and it going to charity seemed to have some truth, and is why I asked, however, I can't verify it, just trying to.

My God. People are crazy on this one.

 

[RoundPeg]

I've read several places that his will mentions a trust created in 1995. Wills are public, trusts are not. I'm guessing if his kids inherit anything, the details will be in that private trust.

 

[Guess Who]

I've read several places that his will mentions a trust created in 1995. Wills are public, trusts are not. I'm guessing if his kids inherit anything, the details will be in that private trust.

Exactly and I heard/read somewhere that there were at least 3 trusts involved. In his case, the will could very well just be for anything not specifically named in one of the trusts. Leftovers, one might say.

 

[GrandmaBear]

I've read several places that his will mentions a trust created in 1995. Wills are public, trusts are not. I'm guessing if his kids inherit anything, the details will be in that private trust.

Thank you. I'm not sure I knew wills were public other than they do go into probate, depending on estate value and that maybe makes them public record, I honestly don't know. I think of trusts as usually to protect kids or a generation or two, etc. limiting when they can receive such, or for what, and at what age. It isn't always the case I know, they can be for charities with directions on how to handle, and of course a trustee and so forth. Some things can be done for tax purposes too.

I wouldn't claim to know much about such but I do know this much, it varies like much does from state to state. And then there's federal law if any on a subject matter. Gift tax, and so on. A subject in itself.

So a trust in 1995 to get back to the point here. So 30 years ago... If you've read it many a place then I'm trusting it's legit places as I know you do and most likely true, that there's a trust. Like I said, there's a lot of garbage out there or rubbish as some would say lol.

I don't really care in one sense but I'm not satisfied with this case yet and think some questions and answers still "dangle". He had a huge estate and a lot of money. I don't want to make it into anything nefarious, I'm just not yet satisfied.

I appreciate the response very much.

It's funny in that I also have worked around wills and trusts back when in my life but laws change, things change and it was a long time ago. Trusts I mostly saw with those who had major money/assets and it's not that someone with enough but a lot less can't do them, they simply maybe aren't as concerned about that kind of planning or they die at a younger age, etc. One brother of mine did a trust. The other had no will at all until known to have a terminal illness, then family members had him do such but no trust.

I'm kind of sidetracking as I do but I'd tell everyone to make their bank accounts and retirements, etc. COD or POD, it can differ depending on where but it means cash on demand or payment on demand if I recall. It's an easy thing and it avoids probate with that. Life insurance too can have that. It also doesn't get counted then for the amount to reach a full probate level. It lets the family or named executor quickly access such and can help pay for funeral expenses, the bills until all figured out, etc. That too is a subject in itself. I only bring it up because I think many don't know it. I don't have a will myself but did talk to an atty. about wanting to do such not too many yrs back then life threw curve balls, etc. and there's nothing much to worry about BUT I'm now thinking I should do that again for a few reasons.

My mom tells EVERYONE to do COD or POD on all they can and I'd agree with that. However, something like this case is going to be far bigger than most of us littler people anyhow.

A trust could have an age the kids had to be or conditions. Or it could be for charities, etc. Trustees could be a bank, a family member, a friend, do I have that right, that's how I recall such. Lol I've always said do a bank or some such, someone with no personal interest because there's nothing like grief that can cause a lot of misunderstandings. Seen such with quite a few families.

I'm doing my wandering, sorry.

I dislike the b.s. going on out there about this big time and it makes it so disrespectful and some are just going on with assumptions, that's both in comments and reporting. Sensationalism big time.

I am though not where I'm yet okay with the answers because all the answers aren't in and I'm just not sure I buy them. I truly only do that in an few, for instance I will never believe there was no foul play in the death of Alex Cox in Daybell. Joe I'm more torn on.

It's also a reason I don't generally follow things with the famous, because the hype will have some suspicious forever. Or sensationalizing. However, sometimes it is true.

Yeah, wandering. Again thanks for the answer. I was going to look up to find what I could that I thought might be legit but hadn't yet.

Been doing dishes, refilling the cat food pail after washing it and such things. Fun stuff, not. Texting a friend, daughter should be coming by in next hour or so, etc.

This thread started in another, then got it's own and then went silent. While out there all sorts of b.s. is going on.

Anyhow again thank you.

I don't really care if kids got anything, or nothing, charity did, etc. other than knowing the answers here and being satisfied. And those things play into that or can. Or they don't at all.