Ritzmar ( and Ron
) : Don't look at me. I can only give hints on English (no, not even Scots ) law.
However in England the answer is that nobody can distribute the assets of the deceased until they have been appointed executor (or 'administrator' in the case of someone leaving no will). They can't get the grant of probate, that is authority to deal with the deceased's property, until they have the death certificate. The death certificate is not issued until the cause of death is established. This means that in any case of a sudden, youthful, or unexplained death or in any case where the coroner thinks it right, there is an autopsy beforehand and an inquest to resolve any question arising therefrom.
Let's assume that the United States adopts a similar practice. Without knowing the answer I'm prepared to guess that it does, in all States.
Nobody who is guilty of murder is entitled to benefit under the will of their victim , or by succession if there is no will, and any gift in their favour under it is void, as a matter of law and public policy. It follows that any instruction in the will along the lines that Ron specifies would be ignored by the Courts as unnecessary or irrelevant.Once the death certificate is issued the body is released for disposal and the executors obtain the grant of probate and proceed to distribute the assets. The only unusual delay then is when someone comes forward to contest the will. The question of a 'trail' between the killer and the beneficiary named is a little more difficult, simply because of proof. It could happen, for example, that the whole will was in favour of the killer, who is not part of the deceased's family and so would not otherwise inherit.It was perfectly valid when made but the killer may have got tired of waiting for the person to die and so killed to get the money immediately. When that will is declared void there would be no will in force so the next of kin, the deceased's family, would inherit under the rules governing cases where there is no will. Unless there is plain evidence that the killer was in league with the family, that they were parties to the killing as conspirators, they would benefit. I can't say that that's never happened and the truth never emerged, but it would surely be rare and is as nothing compared to the number of cases of elderly people whose nearest and dearest are legally robbed by cunning carers, 'lovers' and the like, often acting in league with corrupt lawyers
I have assumed here that these instructions or wishes are given in the will. Any instructions outside the will may be ignored, in law here, as a matter of course. It is up to the executors whether or not they pay attention to them. In fact a lot of instructions in the will itself can be ignored. So, for example, the person cannot bind the executors by insisting on being buried in a given place. All the person can do is hope that such wishes expressed will be carried out.
...)
