Have we discussed the Jason Enloe/Kandi Mahan Drama?

13,815 Views | 33 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by DannyDuberstein
TresPuertas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.golfchannel.com/news/amid-personal-turmoil-jason-enloe-steps-down-smu

Pretty sad situation all around and I can't help but think that Mrs. Hunter Mahan is a giant POS.

You have to be an extremely terrible person to try to take the Money that was left to raise your nieces. There may be something more to this but, damn, doesn't look good
AgDotCom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As the father of two daughters and having been married 31 years, I can't imagine such a nightmare scenario.

It will work itself out, but when when he comes out on the other side he'll wonder how he ever got through it. I feel for him.
nickel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wow. I knew of his wife's passing and some "issues" but didn't realize it was at this level.
I just hope the children ultimately aren't mind fvkt even further through this ordeal near term and long term.
DannyDuberstein
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Kandi mahan is a hoar. And hunter mahan's golf career has imploded over the past 5 years (he's around #700 in the WGR now) after initially being able to provide a nice living. You get used to living one way when you are first married and the money is flowing, then those paychecks and endorsements quickly dry up, stay dry, and suddenly that lifestyle you were enjoying so much isn't sustainable. It screams like the type of situation where kandi would be motivated to be a vulture.
Post removed:
by user
GIF Reactor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
third coast.. said:

Her name is KANDI. WITH A K AND AN I. how are there any questions as to who is in the wrong here?
I have no idea who is in the wrong here, but that was damn funny. Thank you for the laugh!
CCred92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well she isn't ugly. https://larrybrownsports.com/gossip/hunter-mahan-wins-bridgestone-invitation-engaged-to-dallas-cowboys-cheerleader-kandi-harris-pictures/26739/attachment/hunter-mahan-engaged-to-dallas-cowboys-cheerleader-kandi-harris-6
DannyDuberstein
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
No, but that's an old pic. She has been in a tug of war with the fat bomb for a while now
CCred92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's to bad.
AgLA06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm sure this is the perfect example of the old adage about there being 3 versions of the truth. Nothing about the sister in-law and mother inlaw taking the jewelry and life insurance money makes sense unless this guy has some problems (that aren't indicated in the story).
TresPuertas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AgLA06 said:

I'm sure this is the perfect example of the old adage about there being 3 versions of the truth. Nothing about the sister in-law and mother inlaw taking the jewelry and life insurance money makes sense unless this guy has some problems (that aren't indicated in the story).


I would guess that it may have something to do with what one of the posters said above.

She got used to a certain level of financial comfort and Hunter hasn't been able to keep that up. He's made a total of $0 this year and hasn't made over $500k in many years. I'm assuming money is getting tight and Kandi is doing what she can to keep up the lifestyle she wants
CuriousAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
He had to sell his house to Speith a few years ago and lake house was on the market as well. I'm sure she is doing everything she can to pay for her next Louis.
_lefraud_
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Mahan has won over $30 million, if that guy is hurting for money (or lifestyle) than he's got even bigger issues to deal with.

With regards to this issue, I'm guessing the jewelry/clothes of the sister were most likely gifts (from the Means) and Khandi feels like she has the rights to them (super ****ty). And maybe they just don't like this guy.
DannyDuberstein
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Based on the **** going down in his family, I'd say he's got a lot of issues. $30mm is a good chunk, but at the same time, it's a game with a lot of expenses. It's not like other sports. You are a business with expenses that come with running that business. And success like he had at a young age can result in a lack of discipline in managing that dept, especially when you think the money will keep flowing.

The family's argument about the $500k is also poor. They didn't provide a reason for the beneficiary to change. Their defense is "she changed it a week before she died, not one day And well, he didn't complain for over a year". It took him a year to finally decide he was going to have to sue his kids aunt and grandma.
schwabbin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yes pro golf likely has some hefty expenses. But $30M!? No excuses if he pissed that away.
Post removed:
by user
DannyDuberstein
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
schwabbin said:

Yes pro golf likely has some hefty expenses. But $30M!? No excuses if he pissed that away.


that amount gets pissed away in pro sports all the time. Far, far more than that. None of them have a good excuse, but it happens a lot. I'm not saying it's all gone, but based on the stuff he's sold, it seems that he is at least reeling the lifestyle back in (rightly so). So that half million bucks might look pretty tasty to Kandi when hubby hasn't brought home jack **** for 5 years
DannyDuberstein
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
As far as 3 sides to every story, I always agree with that. However, the writer of the article did review and report on their response to his lawsuit. The response seems to have offered nothing of substance to explain why the beneficiary was changed and why dad, who was responsible enough to take out the policy to begin with, is somehow less qualified than aunt Kandi to take care of his own kids with it
TresPuertas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DannyDuberstein said:

As far as 3 sides to every story, I always agree with that. However, the writer of the article did review and report on their response to his lawsuit. The response seems to have offered nothing of substance to explain why the beneficiary was changed and why dad, who was responsible enough to take out the policy to begin with, is somehow less qualified than aunt Kandi to take care of his own kids with it


On top of this, I read the lawsuit and Kandi and her mom were the first to retain council, which possibly suggests they knew what they were doing was wrong
Leander - Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Terrible
aggietony2010
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It just makes no sense that a wife and mother would change the beneficiary to someone other than the husband. I can see having the beneficiary being a trust or something like that to keep the funds for the kids college, but just randomly giving it to a sister when the dad is still in the picture makes no sense.
DannyDuberstein
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
He says according to insurance records, it was changed the day before she died. Or if you believe the sister, a week. Either way, it's unlikely there was clearheaded thinking going on, which is his point/case. That she got duped. There's also nothing logical about changing something at that point in cancer treatment. Those are things you align on a long time before it gets to that point
Swollen Thumb
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ok, I'll go contrarian to most on this thread. It seems there may have been major trust issues and concerns about him by his late wife and her family. And sure enough, he had so much trouble getting over his grief that he already has a girlfriend less than a year and half after his wife dies tragically...just about the same time he filed suit. Not a good look if you ask me.

Family claims the change in beneficiary was something discussed with his knowledge well before it was formerly changed when she stopped treatment.

He didn't challenge it until 16 months later....well after the insurance proceeds were already paid out to the sister? If he believed straight-up fraud occurred, as alleged, wouldn't he contest it immediately?

Family claims a separate bank account was set up for the funds to be specifically spent on the daughters' education, etc.

Family claims the wife wanted them to have her wedding ring and rolex, specifically to give to her daughters when they were older as heirlooms.

Neither of the above sounds outrageous and could quite easily be tracked. In fact, I bet they could reach a settlement whereby the funds/jewelry were held in trust to be used for the girls. But, instead it seem like it's him that wants the money. Coincidentally just as he quits his job, and also starts dating some other lady.

Yeah, I bet that's all gone over real well with his wife's family. Perhaps his wife knew exactly what she was doing in trying to look out for her girls. He wasn't even home half the year (before resigning) so his wife's family probably spent more time with his daughters than he did. I think his wife knew who to trust....and it's not the guy that already has a new girlfriend.

Regardless, it's really sad. Going to be tough on those girls one way or the other.

Flame away.
_lefraud_
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What's an acceptable amount of time to pass before he starts dating again?
Ol_Ag_02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
_lefraud_ said:

What's an acceptable amount of time to pass before he starts dating again?


Year and a half sounds more than acceptable to me.
Ol_Ag_02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Here's what's fundamentally wrong with e families story.

Quote:

Family claims the wife wanted them to have her wedding ring and rolex, specifically to give to her daughters when they were older as heirlooms.


Occam's razor says if you want someone to pass along your wedding ring and watch to your kids you ask your spouse, you know, the children's father; and sister-in-law is a lying ***** bag.
Swollen Thumb
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
_lefraud_ said:

What's an acceptable amount of time to pass before he starts dating again?


Enough time for your law suit over your dead wife's life insurance to settle. But that's just me. To each their own
_lefraud_
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
My mistake, I wasn't prepared for spotting a troll the golf board.

You sound like Goodfield Nohit
Swollen Thumb
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Sick burn, bro.
Quinn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
_lefraud_ said:

What's an acceptable amount of time to pass before he starts dating again?


I know a guy that already had a baby with the new wife within a year and a half.
leachfan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CCred92 said:

That's to bad.
I shouldn't have to thank you for following the rules. But, with the way kids are these days, I thank you Sir.
Yesterday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't think anyone here understands what is going in worth that family and it's sad it's even in the news. That said, I'm here for Kandi. If she needs it.
TresPuertas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
03ki11erAG said:

I don't think anyone here understands what is going in worth that family and it's sad it's even in the news. That said, I'm here for Kandi. If she needs it.


You're going to want to google a current picture before committing to such a thing
KaneIsAble
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
She tricked him. Cowboy cheerleader to....not so much in cheerleading shape....
DannyDuberstein
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ol_Ag_02 said:

Here's what's fundamentally wrong with e families story.

Quote:

Family claims the wife wanted them to have her wedding ring and rolex, specifically to give to her daughters when they were older as heirlooms.


Occam's razor says if you want someone to pass along your wedding ring and watch to your kids you ask your spouse, you know, the children's father; and sister-in-law is a lying ***** bag.
Yeah, they are trying to use the "think of the children" force field as a defense, but no explanation is offered why the one person in the world most likely to make sure the kids are taken care of, their DAD, isn't capable of handling it. Their argument against him is that he apparently didn't decide to sue them fast enough so he must not want the money/stuff back bad enough. Good luck with that line of defense
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.