A Fateful Loophole In The Timing Of Gene Hackman's Death Might Radically Change Who Inherits Half His Estate

On February 26, the deceased bodies of Gene Hackman and his wife, Betsy, were discovered in their mansion in Santa Fe, New Mexico. As you have probably heard, the circumstances of their respective deaths were very unusual. There was early speculation that foul play may have been involved.

That seems to not be the case.

Here's what investigators now believe actually happened:

Betsy died sometime on February 11 of hantavirus pulmonary syndrome caused by rodent droppings. Gene, who had advanced Alzheimer's, continued living in the home on his own for the next week, dying on February 18. Investigators used CCTV camera footage around their neighborhood and Gene's pacemaker activity to piece together the exact timeline of their respective deaths.

Even though foul play was not involved, the circumstances were still highly bizarre. And there's another bizarre twist.

By our estimate, Gene Hackman's net worth was $80 million. Had Gene and Betsy died under any other normal circumstances, his children from his first marriage would have gotten nothing. But a fateful twist might change that.

Gene with his two daughters and wife in 1996 (Getty)

Marriages & Children

Gene Hackman was married twice. His first marriage was to Faye Maltese. They were married for 30 years, from 1956 to 1986. The marriage produced three children:

• Christopher Allen Hackman
• Leslie Anne Hackman
• Elizabeth Jean Hackman

Left to right in the photo above, you have Elizabeth, Leslie, Gene, and second wife, Betsy.

Gene married Betsy Arakawa, a classical pianist, in 1991. According to my research, they had been dating since 1984, which would have slightly overlapped his first marriage. Perhaps Gene and Faye separated long before their divorce was finalized in 1986. Gene and Betsy met while she was working at a fitness center.

Gene was admittedly not around very much during his children's early years. Apparently, that caused friction.

Estate Planning

In 1995, Gene signed a will that made Betsy his sole beneficiary. Crucially, his will DID NOT MENTION his children in the will. I'll explain why this is important longterm in a minute, but short term (while he was alive), it essentially meant he was cutting his children out and leaving everything to Betsy.

After Gene signed his will, Betsy signed her own will. Betsy's will called for all of her assets to go to charity upon her death.

Considering the fact that Gene was nearly 30 years older than Betsy, it was highly probable that he would have preceded her in death. Had that happened, his share of their community assets would automatically go to Betsy. Then, following the terms of Betsy's will, upon her death, those assets would go to charity. In other words, his children would have gotten nothing.

In the unlikely event that Betsy died first, her assets would have gone to Gene, and if Gene truly intended to cut his children out of his will, he very likely would have updated his will to follow Betsy's plan of leaving everything to charity.

Fateful Loophole

As you know, not only did Betsy technically die before Gene, but the timing of both of their deaths may have created a fateful loophole that could greatly benefit Gene's children.

According to documents viewed by TMZ, Betsy's will contained an important provision: If Gene and Betsy died within 90 days of each other, their deaths would be considered "simultaneous." As you now know, they died within 7 days of eachother.

If the deaths were simultaneous, Gene's share of the community property would not flow to Betsy (and then on to charity). Instead, Gene's half of the estate would be considered community property. In New Mexico, community property goes to the person's direct heirs. In Gene's case, that would be his three children.

Now, remember a moment ago when I said Gene DID NOT MENTION his children in his will? That also might be accidentally very important. Had he mentioned them in his will, even by giving them each a nominal amount, that could have been considered enough to force the community property to skip the children and go to his next set of direct descendants. This is why you sometimes hear that a person was left $1 in a will. If you don't want someone to benefit from your will, it's much cleaner to explicitly mention them and leave them a dollar amount like $1 so it's unambiguous that they were accounted for and not accidentally left out. It closes all loopholes. The bizarre timing and circumstances of Gene and Betsy's deaths seems to have created an opportunity for his children to exercise that loophole.