The Murder of Franklin Bradshaw

I have vowed to try to get better about getting back into my blog so yesterday I researched a few cases so that I could sit down and put them together today. It was actually more difficult than I thought it would be. I went back to my list that I have made, as I always do, and started going through the cases until one “caught” me. It took me a while and in fact one of the cases that I researched was not on my list but from a book I recently read because I was frustrated that nothing was really grabbing my attention.

I do not want to say that the murder of Franklin Bradshaw was one of the least shocking things about this case but I cannot say that it was the most shocking either. While of course I did find information about the murder, as well as personality traits associated with Franklin, the “sensational” part really lies with what happened after the murder. A question of law also comes into play.

David Berkowitz is better known as The Son of Sam. Berkowitz committed several murders in New York in the mid-1970's. Despite the fact that Berkowitz claimed that he had no intention of selling his story for either book or movie deals there was wide criticism that if it were to happen that he would benefit from his crimes and that cause an uproar. New York was the first to enact a law in which prevented a criminal from benefiting in any way from their crimes. Other states have enacted similar laws over the years but not without controversy. Many argue that the laws are unconstitutional as they violate the First Amendment against Free Speech. While I do not plan to go into this extensively, as first it is a bit complicated, and secondly, it does not really completely apply here I will say that much of the controversy based on these laws come from the fact that, just as if often the case, some states have extended those laws to basically extend to friends, family and others involved with the criminal. While on the surface I think many, if not most, would agree that a murderer should not benefit from their story, the problem lies with the fact of interpreting and extending the law. Every time a law is interpreted one way and extended just a little bit further the “needle” moves a little bit more until it can really come to a point in which the law is blurry and at that point, in my opinion, you really do begin to cross the Constitutional line. For example, true crime books, or even this blog it self could be pushed to the point in which some would argue they violate the law. The initial and obvious reason for the law in the beginning was to prevent criminals from benefiting but the extensions of those laws could prevent anyone from “benefiting.” And then there comes the ambiguity of what “benefiting” means. Thankfully we have judges who are smarter than the people who bring suit and the lawyers willing to represent them in many cases.

I bring up the Son of Sam law here because there are some that have argued that in this case the law did not go far enough to prevent the person responsible for Franklin Bradshaw's death from benefiting from the crime. I will get into that in a bit but a court would later rule that while one of the people convicted of this crime did highly benefit monetarily, the actual benefits did not come from Franklin himself.

Franklin and Berenice Bradshaw had three daughters, Marilyn, Elaine, and youngest daughter Frances. Franklin was known as “The Howard Hughes” of Salt Lake City Utah. Franklin had built up an auto part business. It appears that much of his original money came from oil and then he turned that money into a chain of auto part stores. At the time of his death in 1978 it was said that he was worth at least twenty million. As is often the case, Franklin held on to much of his wealth due to the fact he was very frugal. By most accounts there is frugal and then there was Franklin Bradshaw. It was said that despite his money he bought his clothes at secondhand stores and even used a Coors beer carton as a briefcase.

As is often the case it appears that youngest daughter, Frances was the most “spoiled” of the Bradshaw children. I found very little when it came to Marilyn and Elaine other than a few quotes they made throughout the years. I can tell you that they both married, although I cannot tell you how “well” they did so and I can tell you that Elaine had at least two children. Beyond that I did not find a lot on them, but in fairness I also did not look very deeply as they were not the main focus of the story and seeing as this is a blog and not a book I did not find it imperative to do so. By 1978 Frances had been married at least twice and had three children. Confusion arose in my research when I read that while her first husband's surname was Gentile and they had two sons together, the boys, Marc and Larry would carry the surname of Frances' next husband, Schreuder. Larry would at some point change his name to Bradshaw but to this day Marc continues to carry the Schreuder name. It was with this latter husband that Frances also had a daughter. But, whether she was still married in 1978 is unclear.

One thing that does seem clear is that by this time tensions were high within the family. It was said that Frances had once been suspended from a prestigious college after stealing and forging checks. She was told that she could only return if she sought psychiatric help but that did not appear to happen. To play devils advocate here a bit I have to say I do not know if this was not done because she, herself, or her family did not think it necessary or possibly from the “stigma” that is associated with mental illness, especially at that time (the mid 1960's) and the perceived “tarnish” it could put on the family's reputation. Frances allegedly was “spending” and donating lots of money to charities and living a very lavish lifestyle despite not earning her own type of income. She was on the board of a Ballet company in New York at the time but again she did not have money coming in of her own. Others have said that while Frances was accused of making these large donations to places that it was actually Berenice who had made these donations and not Frances, but neither apparently wanted Franklin to know this. I think this is very interesting in this story because while it has often been said that Frances was very manipulative to those around her, including her mother, I cannot say that I think that is a complete accurate perception. This is something however, that will never been known for sure. Franklin began to become more and more frustrated with Frances and it was said that he had threatened to cut Frances off financially and was demanding that she find employment of her own. He was also allegedly threatening to cut her out of his will. It was these these threats that allegedly led Frances to begin plotting her father's death.

In the summer of 1978 Frances sent her two sons to stay the summer with their grandparents, Franklin and Berenice in Utah. It was later alleged that she sent the boys with amphetamines and instructed them to lace Franklin's morning oatmeal with the pills. It was said that her hope was that he would have a heart attack that would cause his death. It was later discovered that Frances had actually hired a hit man for $5,000 to kill her father but he had skipped town with her money but it is unclear with this occurred before or after she had sent her sons to stay with her parents. When the amphetamines did not work it was said that the boys stole more than $200,000 in stocks and cash from the Bradshaw home. There were other plans to kill Franklin such as setting a fire and even placing a toaster in his bath. Of course the story is that the only ones that knew about these plots were Frances and her sons, but some have speculated that Berenice could have also been involved. This is the part that will never be known for sure.

Then on July 23, 1978 Franklin was at his auto parts store in Salt Lake when there was what looked like a robbery. The seventy-six year old was shot in the back of the head with a .357 bullet as he stood behind the counter. His pockets had been turned out and emptied and the cash till had been gone through. The local police believed it to be a simple robbery at the store and the leads went cold pretty fast. It appears that for the most part at least Berenice and Frances went on with life as normal. Well, maybe not normal. At this point neither of them had any restrictions put on them as far as their spending. In fact, in 1991 was Berenice did an interview in which she stated Franklin “would die a second death if he saw I was giving his money away.”

Two years later there was a break in the case, a gun surfaced. Some reports say that a man who Frances owed money to gave her sister, Marilyn, a gun in which he stated Marc Schreuder had given him for “safe keeping.” Marilyn gave this gun to the police and it was allegedly traced back and proven that Marc, who was sixteen or seventeen at the time of his grandfather's death, had purchased the gun. It was then that prosecutors and police felt the pieces fall into place.

My research says that in 1982 Marc was convicted of 2^nd degree murder but in fairness it sounds as if he may have taken a plea deal. I say this because it was later said that the following year he testified against his mother, that most often that sort of thing only happens when a deal is in place. He would spend twelve years in a Utah State Prison but it is unclear exactly what his sentence was. Frances was convicted in 1983 of 1^st degree murder charges and despite the prosecutors hoping for a death sentence she received a sentence of twelve years to life and would serve thirteen. Neither seemed to be very long sentences for the crime involved. Marc would testify that his mother continually pushed him to kill his grandfather and told him if he did not do so he would not have a home to go back to. It appears that most of the family believed this to be true as they allege that Frances had always been manipulative. For her part, Berenice paid for for all of the defense attorney's for both Marc and Frances. It was said that this totaled more than two million dollars. The fact that the victim's wife paid for the defense, despite the fact that it was for her daughter and grandson, brought much speculation as to her role in her husband's murder. It appears that at the very least Berenice was not completely unhappy about the death of her husband.

While Frances was in prison Berenice funded a state prison college education program for over $100,000. Frances was the first graduate of the program. But by all accounts that was the least of Berenice's spending throughout the years. Berenice would die at the age of 92 in February of 1996 and this is when the real fight would begin. Frances would be released from prison later that year.

Berenice would continue to support Frances in prison until the time of her death and in fact Frances not only remained in Berenice's will but would be the primary beneficiary of her estate. Family members fought this after Berenice's death claiming that it was unlawful for Frances to receive the money because the money had in essence come from Franklin and Frances had caused his death. It seems their only real solace was that since Franklin's death Berenice had spent much of the actual money and estimated that there was less than two million in cash available. A judge however ruled against the family stating basically that since Berenice was not Frances' victim she had the right to give her estate to whomever she chose.

From her mother's estate Frances would receive a “lifelong income” from half of the remaining money after inheritance taxes were taken out. A trust of some sort had been established as it seems even Berenice may have believed that Frances would “blow” through the money and so she would get a percentage of “it's worth” each year. If there was anything left upon Frances' death it would go to the Utah Opera, a ballet company and Westminster College. Frances also received Berenice's condo, a safe deposit full of jewelry and Berenice's full length fur coat. Family members would say that all of these things were bought after Franklin's death. The second half of Berenice's estate, as far as money, was willed to Elaine's two sons. No one else seemed to receive anything from the estate, or at least nothing of monetary value. Elaine would state that Frances was the “big winner” and that no one could ever argue that crime does not pay even if it took a while to receive. Marilyn would state at the time of her mother's death she did not believe there to be “much” money left and she found some sort of solace in the fact that Frances would not have places to wear the jewelry and the fur coat.

Frances Berenice Schreuder would die in San Diego California in 2004 at the age of sixty-five. She and her son, Marc had been estranged since he had testified against her in the early 1980's until about a year prior to her death. As of 2004 he remained living in Utah.