Riggs Debate

1.)On August 13, 1880, Francis B. Palmer made his last will and testament, which he gave small legacies to his daughters Mrs Riggs and Mrs Preston, the plaintiffs in this action, and the remainder of his estate to his grandson Elmer E. Palmer, the defendant in this action. 2.)Elmer was sixteen years old and was also living with Mr. Palmer and members of the family at the date of the will and the death of Mr. Palmer. 3.)Elmer knew of the provisions made in the will, so to prevent his grandfather from revoking those provisions and to obtain speedy enjoyment and immediate possession of his property, he murdered him by poisoning him. 4.)The purpose of a will was to allow Mr. Palmer to give his estates to whom he wants after his death, and to carry out his final wishes legally. 5.)No one should be able to benefit off of their own crime and also no one should be able to profit by their own fraud, or wrongdoing to gain property by committing a crime. 6.)A will produced by fraud and deception should be declared void and the portion of the will that appears to be fraudulent should not be acted on. 7.)There was no certainty that Elmer would"ve survived Mr. Palmer, and also no certainty that Elmer would"ve gotten the property if Mr. Palmer had died naturally. 8.)Elmer knew that If he died first or died without children who could inherit the estate, the entire estate would return to the daughters and this is another reason why he killed Mr. Palmer. 9.)Elmer also thought that by killing Mr. Palmer it would be an easy and fast way to inherit the estates; without having to wait for him to die. 10.)Therefore, Elmer should not receive the inheritance from the will. Non-Controversial: 1.), 2.), 4.), 8.) Controversial: 3.) because if Elmer did not know about the will and the inheritance he would gain from it once his grandfather died, It is likely that he would not have killed him. Also, Elmer knew that his grandfather had the opportunity of revoking the inheritance and Elmer did not want to take that chance; he wanted to make sure that the estate was his no matter what, so to take matters into his own hands, he killed him. 5.) because if you let people benefit from their own crimes, profit off of fraud and gain property by committing crimes than that"s just like telling someone it is okay to commit the crime; if you start to let this happen, there will be a great rise in crimes all in the name of gaining something from it. In this case specifically, it would not be ok to let Elmer benefit off of his own crime of killing his grandfather because a life cannot be replaced; property can be. 6.) because in this case Mr. Palmer was betrayed by his grandson and I"m sure that when Mr. Palmer made his will it could have never been his intention to allow someone that betrayed him to benefit under his will. 7.) because there could"ve been a chance the Mr. Palmer would"ve changed his will; Mr. Palmer had recently gotten married before his death and he could"ve therefore decided to leave the property to his wife. There was also no certainty that Elmer would"ve gotten the property if Mr. Palmer had died naturally; we don"t know if Elmer would"ve even outlived Mr. Palmer. 9.) because Elmer knew that there was chance he would be disinherited by Mr. Palmer and he also knew that a will can be changed by the person, he wanted security in knowing that once his grandfather died he would be the one to inherit the property and he did not want to wait any longer, that"s why he decided to kill him.