No disrespect at all to Trouble. I'm sure she's a great dog.

A woman I know had to have her cat put to sleep on Saturday. The cat developed what was probably a lymphoma-type condition. The woman's husband is on unemployment at the moment, there are children, and they went from vet to vet to vet trying to find one who would work out some kind of financial arrangements without wanting the entire payment up front. They finally found one about four hours' drive from their home. When they got there, the cat's illness had progressed to the point where it was no longer treatable, and the pain was so great that euthanasia was the only compassionate option.

I keep thinking that a few hundred of that ten million... I also keep thinking that cats and dogs are now luxury items, soon to be afforded only by people like the Queen of Mean.

Just think of all the good that that money could do for many animals if it had been left to reputable rescues or to help people that arr good owners but can`t afford those major Vet Bills like the couple above.
I understand wanting to make sure a pet is well taken care of after your death but 12 million..?
I can see how the grandchildren had no problem proving that she wasn`t competent.

I agree that 12 mil was probably too much for the dog. But that is not the point. A person left a will and the courts (that now decide to make laws rather then intrepret them) decided to go against the will of someone. Just as many other courts have decided against the will of the people.

Just think how that money could have taken care of several hundred dogs and cats. But I understand the love she had for trouble, and Trouble is really cute. I have a 'grandbaby' who is a Morkie (Maltese and Yorkie), and we love her very much. We dress her up and buy her things she really does not need. I have fallen in love with Kate that I decided to start a business in her honor, about dog clothes etc.

The law of trusts in NY is absurd. Whether one likes Mrs. Helmsley or not, it was her money to use as she saw fit. Her intent was clear to eliminate two of her grandchildren from her estate.

Wealthy people do not have a lot of friends so the things they love they have to protect as best they can by substitution. While she may appear to other to be eccentric, I assure you that is within her Constitutional right to be so. When some magistrate judge imposes their view over the intent of the trust settlor, it is a big deal indeed. If you think about the breach of the law here, out of the context of Mrs. Helmsley, understand this could happen to anybody that sets up a trust of any kind.

Think about the grandchildren that went to court and called her an incompetent and I am certain dragged her person through the mud to get their six million out of the estate. She wasn't there to defend herself. Is there anything more ugly than this?

This whole thing is not about a dog. It is about the rights of individuals to give their money to whom and what they please with the expectation that their wishes will be honored. This is an outrage and an insult that this magistrate judge, this low level administrative judge would wipe his shoes on Mrs. Helmsley's trust, a trust that was drawn up by qualified attorneys that attested by the nature of the documents that she had the necessary competency to dictate the terms of her estate.

Instead what you have with these articles is people with empty heads thinking that Mrs. Helmsley was not entitled to do as she desired with her money. It is true that a single loving companion for the dog would have been enough. But the trouble with honorary trusts is they are essentially unenforceable. So judge Mrs. Helmsely harshly if it makes you feel bigger than her. She was a lonely person and I can promise you that lonely people feel very small. For them a pet is a reason to live. Her pet was a great comfort to her in her troubled life and she wanted in some way to return the kindness and unconditional love that this pet gave her.

I deeply resent people on this board that call Mrs. Helmsley the "queen of mean" when in fact that is irrelevant in the state of the law. At best Mrs. Helmsely's life represents that money does not bring happiness or real friends or even family that will truly love you.

The take home message here is that Mrs. Helmsely's will and trust estate was treated with the same justice as were the deaths of Nichole Simpson and Ronald Goldman. You can stand up and applaud if you like, but the loss of legal justice hurts all citizens.